SummaryMike Flanagan's re-imagining of Shirley Jackson's novel focuses on the grown-up siblings who lived in Hill House including writer Steve Crane (Michiel Huisman) and his two sisters (Elizabeth Reaser and Kate Siegel) as they return to face their past.
SummaryMike Flanagan's re-imagining of Shirley Jackson's novel focuses on the grown-up siblings who lived in Hill House including writer Steve Crane (Michiel Huisman) and his two sisters (Elizabeth Reaser and Kate Siegel) as they return to face their past.
The Haunting of Hill House contains some of the most unforgettable horror imagery in film or television in years. The best horror film of the year also happens to be one of the best TV shows of 2018. Don’t miss it.
It's as though Flanagan has taken Jackson's original work, shattered it and then rearranged the pieces to create a completely original, but equally brilliant tale.
Feel sorry for those that said this series is full of cheap jumpscares. The story is so deep and well written for characters development and for a horror series, i dont think the jumpscare is even enough lmao. If u could take ur time to slowly enjoy the show it would have been different. The best horror series u could ever ask for, meaningful and deep and moderate amount of scares. Very well balanced
amazing plot twist, i just loved how they took each episode introducing the family members and the story of house one in the house until it unfolded at the end with the house
It’s a monologue-heavy series, but the writing is rich and haltingly expressive. ... The family’s issues with mental illness are treated sensitively and believably, and Flanagan makes sure to counter every moment of supernatural terror with a reminder that psychological terror is real, that depression, addiction, and ideation are every bit as terrifying as anything lurking in Hill House.
A horror series that doesn’t immediately make a case for itself; like the best of the genre, it’s slowly insinuating, building in power as it tells a story of repressed trauma and family discord. It’s an effective scare-fest that is at its best when the tale does more than jolt the viewer.
The showrunner, Mike Flanagan, builds a dreadful atmosphere, which is crucial, because the creeping pace of his ten episodes would be intolerable if not for its ambient suspense. The show may work best as a binge watch, one where you don’t pay steady attention but instead let it haunt your own house.
Despite some notable flaws, The Haunting of Hill House deserves credit for doing what any good ghost story does: It conjures up the unthinkable and refuses to let us look away.
His Haunting is a two-hour movie spread over 10 hours. That doesn't mean there's eight hours of padding here, but it often feels that way (I saw the first three hours and the last. Sorry, but even TV critics have only so much patience.)
This series is really insane, Mike Flanagan definitly know how to catch the viewers, the quality of the cinematography is perfect. I'm not a big fan of long monologue usually, but every ones in The Haunting of Hill house are really interesting and usefull. Really hard to find negative points.
The main problem with The Haunting of Hill House is that it can't make up its mind about the kind of story it wants to tell. On the one hand, it genuinely tries to be a metaphorical drama about trauma, depression, suicidal thoughts and other heavy subjects. On the other, it's not metaphorical at all, because the ghosts are framed as being real.
It's not done elegantly, it doesn't leave you wondering, it outright states that ghosts are real and that the ghosts are what leads to trauma. Not a difficult childhood, not a death in the family, no; it's all about the ghosts. As a result, all possible points it could've made are invalidated, because—surprise, surprise—it's all just about the paranormal presence.
So, it could've been a decent drama, but it's not because "it's all ghosts, man." Then maybe it's a good ghost story?
No, it's just as mediocre as a ghost story. Sure, there's some impressive imagery, some skilful camerawork and genuinely dreadful moments, but overall there's nothing new about it. Outside of a couple of exceptions, they pretty much look like zombies. There are very few cases where ghosts cause a genuinely disturbing, uncanny valley kind of an effect; most of the time they look like corpses, and it gets boring very fast.
But the worst part is that, while the story bits work in isolation, they don't come together to form a coherent and sensible narrative. Can ghosts kill people? It seems they can, but how and why remains unclear. Why didn't the family move out of the house, after dozens of cases of their kids waking up screaming in the night, let alone the fact that the parents themselves see the ghosts too? Hell, how do these ghosts work? Some of them seem to represent specific people, others just appear as illusions or hallucinations. These questions and many others like these bothered me a lot during the viewing.
The Haunting of Hill House falls short of becoming the smart and chilling show it could've been, instead of relying on illogical storytelling and simplistic imagery, and where it tries to start a complicated conversation, it ends up copping out of it with "it was all ghosts."
Where this show lacks in scares, it more than makes up for in cringey dialogue and never-ending monologues.
Every character sounds like they’re trying to reach their essay’s word minimum. It’s really bad.
I don't why they wasted money paying for the book rights. It bears little relation to the sourcebook aside from the name. If they stuck to the haunted house and the kids it would have been fine, but no, instead we got about 8 episodes of tedious family drama. Episode 6 was one long shot straight out of amateur theatre class. Boring. Not very acted either unless perpetual angst is your thing. Nope, not good.