UnowPriceless hyped garbage

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Numerootno A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

TheAnimalMother I've heard that the book this film is based on is quite good, although you'd never know it from this screen translation. The movie itself is quite terrible in the way it's delivered. It is the type of film that doesn't tell you everything, and wants the viewer to decide what really happened. However this isn't directed with the skill of a Kubrick or a Bergman, nor is this version written well for the screen, so really the film just leaves you going, "What the ****?". Not even really caring much what happened, nor leaving you with interesting ideas of what may have happened. It's just crap really. The story here is an ugly toad covered in warts, as for the princess. Enter Leelee Sobieski who is the one and only reason to watch this confused effort. If you are a lesbian or a male who likes Leelee, then this will satisfy. Otherwise run from this dark place. To me, Leelee was well worth the watch. In fact I couldn't stop watching her, despite the ridiculousness of the story. Leelee's voluptuous body in itself is a feature presentation well worth the price of admission. Cleavage and curves galore, this is the only film in existence that I can think of where a woman's body completely steals the film, and alone makes it worth while. That is truly the way I felt though. The film's story is laughably stupid, however Leelee's body is nothing short of a masterpiece. And so...the princess saves an ugly toad.7/10

cynkat I caught this movie at first in the middle, when Anna was looking for the children at the pond. I recognized the scene immediately and when she called the child "Flora", I knew it was a remake of The Innocents, one of my all time favorite movies. So I found when it was on again and recorded it to watch later, what a mistake! Why do people who make remakes feel obliged to include an obligatory lesbian scene? The aura of suspense was completely obliterated by Anna's wacky behavior, supposedly attributed to her childhood abuse. The tension between Anna and the children regarding Jessel and Quint was non-existent - this is at the core of the story. What a waste of film.

mindcat After reading many of the comments and poor ratings of this flick, by some here, I conclude a mature motion picture as this wasted upon you. A pearl before swines.First the director himself states in the DVD release this is NOT a remake of the Turning of The Screw, and further he is not a fan of horror flicks, as he says, disturbing things happen everyday in real life.And so it is Anna Veigh, a sexually molested and tortured child attempts to help other children so molested by becoming an art therapist. However, she is pawed over and fired by an old school master who in attempt to keep her quiet, finds her a new position as a Nanny with a boy and girl who have been orphaned and now are the charges of their wealthy uncle. The uncle would rather be totally free of the responsibility.The drama unfolds quietly and with a smoldering subtlety that only true drama and mystery lover could appreciate. Sorry kids no bug eyed monsters, disappointed? And no this isn't a female sex flesh flick as some lechers had hoped.It concerns a metaphor and secrets. Each character has a secret and slowly the viewer pieces the parts together.It is assumed Miss Veigh is in fact, losing her mind and imagining dangers and ghosts.She in fact confronts her own molestation and rape as a child, time and again. She like the children is haunted. It appears the previous Nanny, a Miss Jessel and her lover Peter Quint (names borrowed from the James novel), were lovers. It also appears they included the children in their sexual games and haunted them as Miss Veigh is haunted by her childhood molestations.I very much enjoyed the frank and tasteful nudity, the lesbian scenes.The property manager Miss Gross, portrayed elegantly by Tara Fitzgerald, had been in love with Miss Jessel and also courts Miss Veigh.The words, " its not working out" precede each sexual exploitation of the Anna Veigh. Indeed, Miles and Floras seem possessed by the old perverted team, Miss Jessel and Peter Quint.Both Flora and Miles have symptoms very often associated with children who have been sexually abused.The end is very sad and unless your understand what is going on you'll miss it. Why is Miles running from Miss Veigh? Could it be when he blows the candle out he again is sexually exploited? Flora sleeps with her new Nanny and cryptically says, " Do anything YOU like."The last scenes are metaphors for sexually abused children who want to die and feel dirty, responsible for the abuse they received.This is a misunderstood masterpiece. I hope the child actors, didn't quite grasp what it was really all about.See it and try to understand what the director is attempting to put across. Most here are clueless about this flick.

slayrrr666 "In A Dark Place" is a somewhat slow and boring horror drama with a few good moments.**SPOILERS**Fired from a teaching job, Anna Veigh, (Leelee Sobieski) is offered a babysitting gig and eventually takes the position. Brought by assistant Mrs. Grose, (Tara Fitzgerald) to the house, she meets her charges Miles, (Christian Olson) and Flora, (Gabrielle Adam) and is soon tending to their problems as a full-time nanny. When she starts to suspect that something is amiss with them, she decides to learn about the history of the position, and realizes that there's a violent history involving the ghosts of previous residents of the house haunting the grounds and targeting the children. Taking matters into her own hands, she tries to prevent the same thing which happened to them from repeating itself with the children.The Good News: This one didn't have a whole lot to really get excited about. One of the most memorable aspects of the film is it's lesbian relationship, even though there isn't much of that going on. The one sequence where one of them writes in agony in a flowery shirt is nice, and the one sequence where they give in to the temptation and it goes for a mild sex scene is the real highlight, offering up a lot of good points to really serve it well. Some of the haunting scenes are actually good, mainly the ones coming at the end. The fact that they all occur in the frosty winter-land is a little chilling, giving it a nice atmosphere due to the stripped, dead trees reaching out to their victims. It's quite impressive and eerie altogether. The other plus is that they're used in conjunction with the ghostly hauntings, all of in the distance and making them seem even creepier. The last good point is the really nice chase at the end. The stalking in the house is pure gold, lasting much longer than normal and going out to really get a lot going for it. Then it moves out into the wintery forest, which is always great and it's combined into a spectacular conclusion. These here are all that really work for the film.The Bad News: This was an all-together huge missed opportunity for something decent. One of the biggest problems is that the supernatural hauntings are nowhere near center-stage in this, making the drama the real focus of the action. There's very little, if anything at all, in the beginning which is all that great, or even entertaining, centering around the efforts to understand the children. That's not a wholly entertaining avenue to explore in this, especially once it starts dominating and nothing at all really happens, and when they do happen, it's usually a quick-cut sequence that isn't followed up on, rendering it of no importance other than a cheap-jump gag or is written off as hallucinations, which is really a shame since the hide-and-seek game played is rather cheapened of a great, genuine thrill by it's lame revelation. Other scenes are also hurt by this, and it really hurts the film altogether. Another missed opportunity comes from the weakened lesbian angle. Not enough nudity is really shown outside of one sequence, and with a coupler bathing scenes, a make-out fondling and a couple dressing scenes all offering up nothing, all coming off as teasing rather than anything else and coming up as plain irritating. The main missed opportunity with the ghostly haunting also manages to slow the film's momentum down, really making the beginning quite boring, especially with the fact that it's more or less an unnamed remake of a classic in the genre, only with a few minor changes. It's quite easy to pick up on the references, to the manner of job acquisition to the antics between the two to the school problems and much, much more, really taking a large piece with it. The last flaw is the film's rather misused house. This could've been a really creepy, old-style house with modern twists that really could've been a creepy and unsettling place, but is shot all the wrong way and really does the film a huge disservice. These here are the film's flaws.The Final Verdict: With a couple of good parts and some really big flaws, this one is a really big disappointment when it could've been worthwhile. Really only give this a chance if you're a huge fan of the style or those who like the creative side, while those who want some action in their films should heed caution.Rated R: Graphic Language, Violence, Nudity and a mild sex scene