Ghostbusters

All right, so I have to say it. I did not want to watch this movie. I understand that it was a big hit for all of those who watched it when it came out, but it just never appealed to me. Therefore, I had never seen it until I had to watch it for this course. And it took all I could to watch it.

I noticed that it was on TV about a month ago, so I figured that I should watch it while I had the chance. Flipped the channel, propped up a pillow, and leaned back to enjoy. All I thought while it was slowly getting to the end was, this is sooo long. Maybe it was the commercials or maybe it was my lack of interest, but I wanted to change the channel or just simply turn off the television. Let me be honest, maybe I’m just so used to the modern day special effects and all of that hoo-haw that I was sort of not swept right away with the effect from 1984. Maybe..?

I’ll stop complaining now. I get that it was a comedy. I completely understand that. And it was funny – at times. Little things throughout the movie made me laugh. Honestly, I guess the fact that it was a comedy poked some fun at the fact of their “job” of choice. I mean, some shows that are out there now about ghost hunters and such are funny, but that’s a completely other situation. Back to the comedy and some of the things that I did find funny and like. The cleaning lady near the beginning of the movie when they are chasing the green blob cracked me up when she was almost shot (laser beamed?). I really enjoyed the character Louis and his “relationship” with Dana. I rather love Rick Moranis, so maybe that’s why I liked the character Louis, but I found his never-ending attempts at Dana funny. It reminded me of the typical “nerd likes the popular girl” scenario, but it made me laugh. It was like Louis didn’t realize how much of a dork he really was.

Seeing as though the movie was about ghosts and removing them, the movie wouldn’t be complete without some sort of possession – and of course, it had to be the love interest of one of the characters. Expected or unexpected with Dana becoming possessed, I thought it was a little on the weird side – maybe because she was trying to seduce to find the Keymaster? I don’t know…just weird to me. The last thing that I wanted to mention was the marshmallow man. I’m not sure if it was to be a humorous element put in place of a scary one or not. I’m guessing yes. Anyway, it stuck out as one the most memorable parts…when they become covered in all the goo. Oh, and who could ever forget the lovely song that goes along with it all – I found myself singing it in my head while I typed this.

Overall, I thought that the movie was all right. It was okay. I mean it worked. All of the elements present, from the comedy standpoint (with the various humorous sayings and characters) to the horror/ghost standpoint (it was creative and had some action packed parts), meshed well to create something memorable. Would I watch it again? I doubt it, but it was worth a shot.

A Christmas Carol

A Christmas Carol. What can I really say about this story? In all honesty, I was not really looking forward to reading this one. Why? Not only because I know the story, I mean how many of us have been read/told this story and have also seen how many versions of it? Anyway, I like the story a lot – really, I do – I just dislike Charles Dickens so, so much.

The story. Let’s talk about it. As I just stated, I like it. I think that the characters, especially Scrooge, are fabulous. I’m not sure about anyone else, but I can think of at least a few people that I know in real life that are like ol’ Ebenezer (you know, just very unhappy and miserable…with everything). He comes across as a character that you shouldn’t like. He’s mean. He’s miserable. Yet, I felt bad for him. He’s lonely. He has a reason to be so mean and miserable, even if it all was his own fault. I enjoyed going on this journey with Scrooge. I like how we see Scrooge come around and “evolve,” so to speak, by visiting the past, present, and future. I loved meeting the different ghosts. Can I admit that I have seen the Mickey Mouse version of A Christmas Carol waaay too many times and I always visualize Jiminy Cricket as the Ghost of Christmas Past? Therefore, as I read about the small, childlike figure…well, I just couldn’t stop thinking about Jiminy Cricket. Curse you, Disney animation. Eventually, I got past that and really got the image of the ghost.

Anyway, I thought that the story had a lesson for everyone to relate to in some way or another – either with past events and regrets, greed and success, or simply happiness. We all make choices, sometimes thinking that they are for the best, and then we look back and regret some of them. Granted, I doubt we all would push away everyone we know and care for because we want to be rich and successful, but you never know. Maybe you know someone like that! Scrooge’s journey from what was, to what is, and to what’s to come makes him more of a likable character. As I already said, I felt bad for him from the start. It’s not that I really liked him; I guess I just pitied him for how he was and how he treated people. As we see him realize how he treated people to get his “success,” he becomes a more likable person because we get to see why he is the way that he is – or maybe it’s simply because of his own realization? Of course, it brings various questions up. Is money the root of all evil? Can money buy happiness? Does success equal happiness? I guess there could be simple answers to all of those, but regarding this story and other stories, would the answers be the same?

The good and the bad. The story/plot is fabulous. Kudos, Charles Dickens. The story is lovely, as are the themes it contains. Plus, for it being December it really puts you in the holiday spirit. The characters are also great, from Scrooge to the ghosts, and to even Tiny Tim. They help create a wonderful world and story that sucks you right into it. I’m that I finally sat down and read the story myself – because I had my own notions about it because it is a very well known story with several adaptations out there. The only thing that I did not like about A Christmas Carol was simply the fact that Charles Dickens wrote it. Let me explain. I think that the stories written by him are actually really great. I just dislike his writing. I feel like I’m a kid in high school complaining about reading Shakespeare. It’s not that the story is horrible, it’s just the way that it is written. Anyway, once I got past that…I enjoyed myself!

By the way, I feel I have to add that I'm going to see my school's musical tonight, A Suessified Christmas Carol. Ironic, just a bit.

Paranormal Activity

Paranormal Activity is one of those films that people either love or they hate. In my case, it became a movie that I came to like the more that I watched it. I still remember going to see it the day that it came out in theaters – it was a sold out showing and I was lucky enough to get tickets because of my friends.

The commercials/previews for it showed an audience freaking out and phrases like “the scariest movie of the year” appeared on the screen. I’m a scary movie fanatic, so of course I just had to see it! I left the theater thinking that it was good, a little Blair Witch-y take on being haunted, but it wasn’t THE SCARIEST MOVIE. I’ve totally seen better films.

I enjoyed the whole home video quality of the film. I think it added a realness to everything that happened. Don’t get me wrong, at some points the filming seemed ridiculous. Take the spider incident. Katie yells for him – something is obviously wrong – yet he runs for the camera FIRST before running for her. Really? I would like to think that my own boyfriend would run to me first to see what was wrong before grabbing his camera. On the other hand, it does show his eagerness, and relentlessness, to catch something on film.

I found the actual “hauntings” to be done fairly well. I liked how they started out on a quiet note – lights turning on and off, doors moving, sheets moving, etc. – and got a little scarier by the end of the film. My favorite parts involved in all of the paranormal incidents had to be the footprints in the powder and also when we heard the footsteps and then their bedroom door slams shut. I love how the movie plays on the fear of the unknown – not only do we not know what exactly is haunting them (other than some demonic force with odd footprints), but we never actually SEE anything. And the fact that it is something we don’t see makes it seem all that much scarier.

Then we have the final scene. This time she MAJORLY screams, and he doesn’t care to grab his camera. I guess it’s nice to know in a time of a possible crisis, he did care more about his girlfriend. The footsteps back upstairs create crazy suspense – they last forever. Then they stop and there’s silence. I think that is genius creating an intense moment of what the heck is gonna happen?! I didn’t jump when he hit the camera, but when I made my sister watch this movie (who’s a big wimp), I could not wait for this! She literally jumped out of her seat. Now the actual ending…well, I thought it was sort of dumb. Ooooo, Katie’s haunted – the reason behind everything. Whatever. I guess it made some sense for this ONE movie, but as Paranormal Activity became this huge movie phenomena with a sequel and prequel…well, it got a little out of hand.

Let me explain. As I said, I like the first Paranormal Activity. The more that I watched it, I liked it. I even bought the DVD when it came out. I even found the second film enjoyable to watch and the storyline still made some sense. BUT…has anyone seen the third film?! I have and it just got a bit out of hand and for me, made the other two films/storyline seem to not make much sense.

Anyway, I liked the movie! Even though I know it is a staged film made to look real (cough…Blair Witch…cough), I liked it. Paranormal Activity took the whole ghosts and hauntings aspect of the paranormal world and made it seem a bit believable. For the most part, I think that the first film seemed as though it could be real. You know, if ghosts existed…oooo.

Grave's End

I like how similar books are paired together in a way throughout our syllabus. First we had The Haunting of Hill House followed by Hell House, and now we went from The Amityville Horror to Grave’s End. It’s interesting to find similarities and differences between stories that are similar in one way or another. Anyway, back to the story at hand.

As we are to look at Grave’s End as a true story, I looked at it as just that. Call me gullible or simply a wannabe believer, you tell me something is true then I’ll think that it actually happened. I found Grave’s End to be a very believable story. As we all had our issues with Amityville, I found Mercado’s account to be more believable. I think that she starts the book validating her own story for us. Obviously, there are skeptics out there and I liked how the book opened with her telling us that we are about to read her story of what happened. I think that the fact of her letting us know that it took her a while to even think about writing the book proved her story for me.

Like The Amityville Horror, this book read the same. By this, I mean that it was more focused on the telling of the story/events than anything else. I liked that even though the main point was what went on in the house, Mercado still made me feel for her and her family – maybe it was the concern she had for her daughters, the fright and terror she felt, or her dealing with her husband/marriage. She let us into her life during this period of time. She could’ve written the story of the several incidents that occurred, but instead she mixed these incidents with everything else going on in her life. I felt bad for her dealing with the haunting of her house while also dealing with the stress of nursing school and the issues with her husband.

Although Grave’s End read similarly to Amityville, I found this story to be completely different in the way of believability. As I stated that I read it from the standpoint that it was true right from the beginning, the events that took place seemed more realistic and never seemed so out there that it was beyond the realm of being true. The parts that creeped me out more than others were when Mercado mentioned the footsteps she would hear, breathing in their ears, the feeling of being watched, and the suffocating dreams. Oh man, those suffocating dreams! These would definitely drive me out of a house – especially if it felt like someone/something was touching me and trying to pull my legs apart. Whoa is all I can say to that. I definitely give them credit for staying in that house for years. The whole timeline confused me a bit here and there too. Anyway, all of these occurrences seemed more likely to happen, and even scarier because of that, than those that happened in Amityville.

While overall I liked the book, there were some things that I didn’t like and/or confused me. One of the main things that stuck out to me was the deal with the tree in front of the house. What was the deal with it? Did she just like it? I guess since she mentioned it right at the beginning, and referenced it other times throughout, I kept expecting something to happen with the tree. I suppose it was just a little of a letdown with that. Something else I was sort of confused by was Mercado’s daughter Christine. I understand that her bedrooms were additions to the house and that’s why she didn’t have trouble at night, but she didn’t really have much interaction or problems in the house. She saw some things and had the water thrown on her, but not much else. It made me wonder why it seemed like Karin and Elaine had the most trouble in the house – I do give Karin props for staying in her rooms and not wanting to move, because if I was in her place, I would’ve moved in with my grandparents!

As I said, I liked the book. I read it from start to finish as a true story and enjoyed it. I think it started to get a little slow/repetitive about certain things in the very last chapter, but other than that I found it to be an interesting read.

The Amityville Horror

I guess a lot of you had some trouble getting into The Amityville Horror. I, on the other hand, had no trouble whatsoever getting into the book. I knew a little bit about the story of what happened, but never truly read the book – so I was excited to read it. Maybe that’s why I got into as much as I did, and as easily. I wanted to keep reading to see what happened next.

I know that we said it was admittedly a “hoax,” but something that I liked about the text was the setup and parallel between the Lutz family and Father Mancusco. I thought that this parallel made it seem more “real” for me – I guess giving another’s testimony to the events makes it more believable for me. If things happened to more than one person regarding the same stuff, did it actually happen?? I tend to think yes, so I suppose most of the incidents in the book appeared real to me. Anyway, back to Father Mancusco and the Lutz family. I found it interesting when something bad happened to the Lutz family, it was usually accompanied by something horrible happening to Father Mancusco. I actually found the events that happened to Father Mancusco worse than those happening to the family. They dealt with sounds, feelings, slime, and whatnot – and there’s the Father with blisters rupturing on his hands. That’s just my opinion though. If I were Father Mancusco, I would have listened to others and stayed away. If I were a member of the Lutz family, I would’ve headed for the hills too. I think out of all the things that we were shown and introduced to in the book, the whole secret red room under the stairs was the creepiest for me. And the fact that George stated it smelled like blood – well, that just made it worse. I will admit, though, that the “happenings” in the Lutz household were getting out of hand by the end of the book. The whole figure standing on the stairs seemed a bit cheesy to me. The green slime/jell-o like substance seemed a bit weird to me as well. I didn’t really get the significance about the green slime.

Now, I’m not sure about anyone else, but I kept waiting for something horrible to happen to the dog. I can take stuff happening to people, but as soon as someone’s pet is hurt, I feel terrible. Same goes with movies – I can take decapitation, mutilation, and whatever of people, but as soon as it happens to an animal I want to turn it off. So, I kept waiting for Harry to be majorly hurt in some way or another.

I know that I stated it on the forum, but one of the main reasons why I like books such as The Amityville Horror is the fact that I like to think that stuff like this really happens and ghosts really exist. Of course, I stand as the one who somewhat believes in it all, but I am also a “see to believe” type of person as well. Nothing has ever really actually happened that scared me so much that makes me believe in it all. Then again, I’m not really sure how I would truly react if something did. I think I could take the noises and such happening, but I’m not sure about other stuff.

Something that I liked, but also didn’t like, was the way the book was written – and by this I mean the plain, this is the way it happened way of writing. We weren’t really put into the position of the Lutz family; we were told what had happened to them and Father Mancusco. I think that this style of writing made the book go fast for me, but it was more or less a story being told to me. I’m not sure if I would like the book more or less if it was switched to putting us in the story – maybe from the perspective of George, or switching between anyone involved in the events. It may have seemed more creative if told in this manner, but I also think it would take away the “realness” of the story.

At the end of the day, I liked the book. I found it interesting – real or fake – and I enjoyed reading it. Some of it may have been cheesy or outlandish, but some of it seemed as though it could happen, and that’s why I liked it.

The Lovely Bones

The Lovely Bones is a story that freaks me out at the major possibility of it happening. The situations and events that occur throughout are so real and relatable that it makes the story scary.

One of the main things that make the book scary is the place where we see everything take place. It’s a nice little neighborhood. It’s a neighborhood that could very much be my own neighborhood as a kid. And look what happened. When I was younger my mom would always tell me be careful, don’t talk to strangers, etc. We all have heard the known advice and warnings of parental figures. I’m not sure if it’s the fact that we all think we are invincible when we are younger or that we just don’t think about bad things ever happening to us. We’re too trustworthy as kids and Susie is no different. This story is sort of a “what if” tale – this could happen to anyone anywhere. And that is scary.

Another part of the book that makes it scary is Mr. Harvey. Wow. Talk about creep factor with this one. Actually, I think he makes a fantastic “bad guy.” Who doesn’t know someone like Mr. Harvey? I think we can all recall at least one person in our lives that was a quiet, somewhat odd person. Add in the fact that he likes to build dollhouses, and of course rape and kill several women. Obviously, we know from the start that he is the villain, but I think that Sebold’s characterization of him makes him that much worse as the villain. Like I stated, he’s creepy to begin with and the little details she provides us (his hobbies, his reactions to things, etc.) make him all the more worse.

Sticking with the aspect of characters, I think that Sebold created several fabulous characters. The family she gives us – the Salmons – is wonderful. They are all likable (some may have issues with the mother…) and the fact that we are with them from the start, we sort of go through what they are going through – and it tugs at our hearts. I mean, at times, I found myself wanting to scream when the police wouldn’t listen. And what about her mother and Len?? I found it shocking, but I think that it actually added to the story. We saw how this family reacted to this tragedy and interacted with each and even grieved about it.

There weren’t too many things that I disliked about the story. One major issue I had through was the whole Susie inhabits Ruth body. I absolutely hated this part of the book. I found it completely weird. I liked the character of Ruth and her “abilities,” and I didn’t even put two and two together and figure out that Susie would communicate through her. All in all, I just didn’t like it.

A few things that I liked about it besides the characters and the setting were the icicle and Lindsey’s journey into Mr. Harvey’s house. First, the icicle. I loved how Susie told us about the icicle – it’s the perfect weapon beside it melts away. I loved that! And then how Mr. Harvey is foiled and dies because of an icicle is brilliant. It makes you wonder if Susie had a little hand in that or not. I found that Lindsey’s journey into Mr. Harvey’s house was a great suspenseful scene. It had me guessing whether or not she would be caught, and the Salmons would have to deal with the same thing all over again. I’m glad that Sebold had her escape – I’m not sure what would’ve happened if he caught her.

Overall, I liked the book. I think it started out great and just went from there. That first little bit of the book was intense and immediately drew me into the situation and story at hand. I wasn’t sure how the whole dead teenager as a narrator would work, but it did. And it worked very well. I guess in a way that gave the reader possibilities about this “what if” scenario.

By the way, I really love the title... :)

The Others

I have only seen this movie once before and that was about when the movie came out. Before watching it again, I could only remember two things: one scene with the little girl and the fact that the family was ghosts. I remember thinking the movie was a good movie, but as I watched it again, I barely remembered anything else other than those two things.

First thing I want to mention is the scene with the little girl. This was the scene in which she is in the white gown, sitting on the floor and playing with the puppet. Then her mother walks in to find the hand and face is that of an old woman. This scene stuck with me because I think for me it was one of the creepier scenes. I guess movies with children tend to creep me out…she looked like an old woman, but the voice was that of the little girl. “Are you mad?! I am your daughter.” Plus, the accent added a little for me.

The other thing – the fact that the family was ghosts – I could remember because it was the big twist…I suppose. Although I knew that they were ghosts, I didn’t recall how exactly it ended. I must say that I really did like the ending. How it was revealed that they were ghosts was great. “Sometimes the world of the living gets mixed up with the world of the dead.” The film combined the worlds together perfectly in a way that made sense, yet also seemed believable.

More on the role of the ghost in this movie. I liked how if it was the first time someone viewed the film, you felt as though Nicole Kidman’s character, Grace, and her children were living and truly being intruded by people(s) unknown. I enjoyed how a focus was put on the connection of the living and dead and even the children kept asking about where different people go when they die. Even with this focus, it wasn’t an obvious point to think that they actually were ghosts who didn’t understand that they were dead. The film made you think it at times, but also went back and forth between the family and the servants. Who was really dead? It was a surprise to find out that they all were, just trying to keep the house as their own.

Since we mentioned the “argument” of books/writers versus films, I wanted to mention some of the things that I believe helped with the movie. I know we mentioned sounds in the discussion on the forum and I want to discuss this for a minute. I must say that the sounds of the music helped me get into it. Since I sort of knew the big twist, everything that happened throughout it was kind of bleh for me. The music helped me a little. I found the music fantastic. I thought that it helped portray the atmosphere of the film, but also the feelings of Grace and what was really happening. I remember her standing by the gate when her husband “left,” and she hears her children scream because the curtains were gone. Anyway, I just liked the music in general, but I thought it did assist with the mood. I also think the sounds of the whispers were great. I found the whispering to be SO creepy, yet so wonderful. When Grace was in the room by herself near the beginning, then she starts ripping off the white coverings on items in the room, and also when the kids are hiding in the wardrobe near the end. I found the whispering to be great (and also helped with that whole melding of the living world with the dead world).

Overall, I liked the movie. I think I like the actual story of it more after watching it again because I knew certain things that I didn’t before, so I appreciated it better.

OH and one more thing that I wanted to mention that I enjoyed was the fact that the kids kept saying that ghosts wore white cloths. I particularly enjoyed this when the girl discovered the gravestones and yelled at her brother to run, and he kept telling her that they weren't wearing white cloths. I liked this because it showed you the way that kids think about ghosts, but it also added to the creepiness when they found out that their servants were ghosts and not actual living, breathing people.

The Shining

First thing first – my only actual experience with Stephen King books has been Salem’s Lot and Desperation. All my other Stephen King experience has been through movie versions of his work. Oh…shame, shame on me.

I know that the movie version of The Shining has become super infamous, I guess maybe even cult worthy? I don’t even think I could tell you the first time I actually watched the movie version, let alone how many times. With that said, I was really excited when I saw this title on our list for this class.

From the start of my reading of this book, I noticed tons of stuff that was either different or completely nonexistent from that of the movie version – which is common for pretty much any movie based off of a book. Anyway, throughout reading this book I really enjoyed the simultaneously thoughts/points of views that we got. Without this, I don’t think the story would have been as expertly told. By this, I mean that the story and events would not have been as solid if they were from one person’s viewpoint. Such as we all had issues with Eleanor from The Haunting of Hill House, what would we think about this story had it been told from Jack’s focus? I think that by the reader getting these multiple points of view, it adds a sense of realness to the story. If the same things are happening to more than one person in the story, well then, it must actually be true, right?

One thing that I did like from the book that you don’t really know much about from the film version is all the details about the hotel itself – I liked getting the history of the hotel. I found it interesting when Jack found the scrapbook and went through all those little various incidents, and how we got a hint at them through Danny.

Even though there are all these little things I like about the book, I think that the overall story is great. We have this little family, who although have had their rough times, love each other, but we also have these two individual who are plagued by their past – especially Jack. I liked how King places little bits of past information and events that reflect who both Jack and Wendy – mostly Jack – are. These little flashbacks sort of gave me sympathy for Jack, but as I said, they also gave a sense of who Jack is/became. Granted, I understand that the whole setup of them being secluded at the hotel has majorly pushed Jack to go crazy, but I also think – was it bound to happen? Was he bound to end up like his own father? Was it a vicious cycle?

One thing I thought was odd about the book, but played a part in the delusional fun at the Overlook was the hedge animals. The first incident with them I found it odd and I would freak out myself if I thought a hedge animal moved, but when they actually physically attacked – well, I just thought, enough with the hedge animals! They’re just hedge animals!

Overall, I enjoyed the story. I think that Stephen King is a great storyteller with fabulous ideas that come into his mind. I didn’t care much for the oooo scariness in this book as I did for the past few – but I think that is because I enjoyed the movie version, so I figured I would already like the book from the start.

PS - In case you didn't know...Stephen King weekend on AMC. Watch for the The Shining!

Ghost Story

The other morning (and I’m talking 5 am early), I found myself thinking about how freaked out I would be if I saw a little boy’s face peeking in from outside the living room window. I realized then that Peter Straub’s story stuck in my head a little more than I thought it did.

When I finished Ghost Story, I wished that my mind was a little more complex and/or complicated that it actually is – that is, I wished that it worked this way when I write. I didn’t understand how well everything fit together in the story until I was near the end of it. Then I saw the full circle of just how well it all really did. Speaking of not understanding how it all fit together, I was slightly confused at the beginning – we meet Don Wanderly, a man who obviously just kidnapped a little girl, then he sort of vanishes and we meet the Chowder Society. Odd, but Ricky Hawthorne pulled me in a little more.

As I started the book, I was not excited to read it. I was less interested in it than the first two books, and was not as eager to read it as the books that follow it on our list – not because it’s not a good read (it is), but because of the reason I just stated. I will say that throughout the entirety of the text, it kept me guessing.

Along with the plot, of course we have the characters that create this story. I must admit that I really enjoyed the characters – the individuals that they were and the little “groups” that they made up. I actually have never read a book in which we follow a group of older gentlemen and I thought the Chowder Society was an awesome group with this deep, dark secret. Granted, the one thing that I did tend to dislike was the back and forth with the flashbacks. Now, I don’t think we could have done without them – because let’s face it, the story would be pretty confusing if we didn’t have that background info. I did like when we went back in the past with the stories from the Chowder Society, BUT I do think the only essential stories were from Sears (when he told them about Fenny at the beginning) and the story about Eva Galli near the end. Anyway, back to the characters – I enjoyed the Chowder Society and also the others that had their own little storylines (Stella, Peter, Jim, etc.).

Something else that I thought was excellently done by Straub was the atmosphere used throughout the entire book. Where I had issues with other little things, something that I thought was done perfectly was the atmosphere. He did a great job creating that spooky, edge of your seat atmosphere. He did it through the dialogue and the story, but what was done better than anything else was the use of the weather. From the start of the book, I thought, well, I’m not looking forward to winter. When I think about, I don’t know how many books I have read that were set in the winter season, but I liked how Straub focused on this weather. The weather sort of acted like another enemy for them. It became treacherous – hard to maneuver about in and it was deadly cold. It also added to them being stuck. When the storm came, they were literally stuck where they were, but in life they were stuck and they were scared. The snowstorm added to the scared, claustrophobia that was Milburn and the Chowder Society.

The only real issue I really had with the story was the end. Throughout the whole book, for me, the story/plot was great, as were the characters – then we have the end. The end of the book, and also the end of the Eva Galli vampire, werewolf, shapeshifter creature thing. Honestly, when I closed the book when I was completely finished the first thing that came to mind was – a wasp? Really…a wasp? I guess I just expected something more at the end.

Overall, did I like the book? Yes. Like I said already, I thought it was well written and the story itself was interesting.

Hell House

I began reading Hell House shortly thereafter reading The Haunting of Hill House – it was my strong attempt to get ahead. With similar titles, I went with my gut and figured that they would be similar stories…well, at least about houses, haunted houses.

If I’m being honest, I was more interested more in Hell House right off the bat than I was with The Haunting of Hill House. Why? I think it mainly deals with the characters. As I stated previously (blog and forums), Eleanor was never much of a favorite character. Granted, Hell House doesn’t get the prize for most memorable characters, but I liked them better. They had my attention more. Plus, I was with Dr. Barrett in proving his theories from the get go. I was interested to see his infamous machine. I must also throw in there that I was hoping to have a better experience at Hell House!

Back to the characters, I liked how they all had their place at Hell House and I thought their place here was better thought out in “proving” that this infamous house was indeed haunted. Matheson gave them all reason and purpose to be there and layered them just so. I enjoyed how we had the scientific side of the haunts, but we also had the spiritualistic side of them as well…and of course, we had to have the only survivor of the previous Hell House stay. I enjoyed how Matheson gave us two sides to this horrific house through the characters he created. He gave us all the details that we needed in order to “see” and “feel” this angry and terrifying house, and as he gave us these details to pull us into the story, he gave us varying ways to believe what is going on here. As we talked about on the forum, whether you actually believe in ghosts or not, Matheson sort of gives us both sides of the coin. Dr. Barrett always has his answer to why there are noises or actual physical retaliation from the house, but we also have Florence handing us the other aspect as to why everything could be happening. Although while we have those two sides/arguments/people, let us not forget Dr. Barrett’s wife, Edith, and Ben. Although Ben has his ideas, we are sort of cut off from them at first – he came off to me as the person Florence wished she could be – and Edith played the part of the scaredy cat in all of us.

While I found the main characters portraying all the sides of “beliefs,” and they did make up much of the story, or at least carried the story, I thought that Belasco himself created the story. He was the story. He was the reason why these people were at his house. Belasco added the creepy element to the story for me. He was deranged, weird, and just plain scary. The descriptions of him throughout the book were frightening, but the things he did were as well. Until the end we have this vision of a man who is very tall and “imposing” and who was some sort of crazy, animalistic puppet master.

Speaking of creepy and frightening, I need to mention the moments that worked for me. When Florence was in her room and the blanket flew from the bed and onto someone was frightening. When the blanket was pulled from the bed, I thought okay…at least we have some interaction in this book…then when it talked about the form under the blanket – that took it to the extreme of scary for me. Call me a baby, but I did like that part. It was something! At least from that point on, I knew Hell House would be an enjoyable book for me. Let me say Florence was the Eleanor of this story. Girlfriend was vulnerable from the beginning. Granted, I feel that she wanted the experience that she got…well, minus the whole part of her dying. I felt terrible for this character! Terrible, yet so utterly grossed out – “His gaze shifted to her genitals…the outer tissues shredded” (249). What also added to the creepy feel for me was the atmosphere of the entire book. I liked how they had to drive to this house pretty much in the middle of nowhere, through the fog and mist of the bog. And of course we get to this mansion and it has no electricity. All the various elements of the scenery and the descriptions that Matheson used brought me into the story and gave me goosebumps. Of course along with the creepy and frightening that I already described, I cannot talk about this book without discussing the element of sex. Wow. Matheson, could you be any more of a weirdo?? From the start we see sexual references (in the chapel) to the pictures Edith comes across and pretty much everything that happens to Florence (and the focus on Florence throughout the majority of the book is sexual). I get it…it made the story. It was the aspect of Belasco that made him deranged for me – “One of his favorite hobbies was destroying women” (58). But as I said, Hell House certainly would not be what it is without that aspect of sex weaved into the story.

Overall, Hell House was a great book. It gave me the chills I wanted, but it got me involved in the story. Matheson created these fabulous characters that I liked and worried about throughout the book, but also placed them in this crazy, realistic place that came alive for me. I enjoyed reading it from beginning to end.