A serial killer returns to his hometown to stalk seven children who share the same birthday as the date he was allegedly put to rest.A serial killer returns to his hometown to stalk seven children who share the same birthday as the date he was allegedly put to rest.A serial killer returns to his hometown to stalk seven children who share the same birthday as the date he was allegedly put to rest.
- Awards
- 1 nomination
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaThis is the first film that Wes Craven has both written and directed since New Nightmare (1994)
- GoofsDuring the phone conversation between Brandon and Brittany Brandon's iPhone shows the home screen.
- Quotes
Bug: I am the condor. The Keeper of the Souls. I eat death for breakfast. I live in a house of blood and I accept that. That's all a man can do. I was ready to be arrested that night. I wasn't ready for what happened instead. Leah had told them everything and I was celebrated as a hero. Alex Dunkelman killed his stepfather, a cop, a mother, and five of the Riverton Seven. And I alone had stopped him from killing more. I didn't feel like a hero at all. But if it makes Riverton feel safe at night, I'll fake that I'm their hero. And I'll fake it good. Alex wouldn't have it any other way.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Estrenos Críticos: 10/06/2011 (2011)
- SoundtracksPLAGUE BEARERS
Written by Karl Buechner, Scott Crouse, Ian Edwards, Dennis Merrick and Erick Edwards
Performed by Earth Crisis
Courtesy of Century Media
** (out of 4)
Wes Craven's return to the horror genre hits with a major thud and turns out to be his most disappointing film since VAMPIRE IN BROOKLYN. The story is a pretty interesting one as a serial killer murders his pregnant wife as well as six other people but after being shot and stabbed he's involved in an ambulance crash. His body is never discovered but it's pretty clear he's probably dead so the community moves on. Sixteen years later the seven kids who were born on the day he died are know dropping like flies so is it a copycat killer, the dead man's son, the killer himself or perhaps just his ghost? There are many, many good ideas floating around this film but in the end it's just way too uneven, confusing and at times laughable to really work. I'll start with the screenplay that has a few interesting ideas including the fact that souls can jump from one body to the next. This is an interesting idea and they do a few nice things with it but it really seems like this psychological idea was nixed at some level and some executive cut in saying this was a horror film and needed more murders. The movie, for the most part, deals with the fears of these seven kids and then we have more psychological stuff about them being haunted and cursed. Then, out of no where, the film seems to switch on a dime to turn into some crazy slasher where the victims are being torn apart. The psychological stuff begins to wear thin as the story grows more and more out of whack and while the screenplay gets a lot of the blame you can also point the finger at Craven. The first sequence on the bridge actually contains some of that Craven magic where your pulse goes from zero to sixty in a matter of seconds and this expands to an earlier scene where you just know the killer is going to come back to life and although you're expecting it when it does finally happen it makes for a good jump. The problem is that Craven really doesn't handle the psychological stuff too well and this is where the movie really loses its way and in the end crashes and burns. I'd be willing to bet that we're going to get a couple alternate endings when we finally get a DVD release because the ending has so much going on you can't help but feel things could have ended in a dozen different ways. One of the worst sequences in the film is perhaps the most bizarre and it's a big chase sequence in the woods. We start off with a possible sexual assault before things changing up and we're seeing the killer chase two different victims. This scene really doesn't make too much sense and in many ways what starts it seems out of place but not a single frame of this long sequence has any suspense to it, which is shocking since we're talking about a Wes Craven film. The performances are about on par for this type of movie so no complaints there. MY SOUL TO TAKE seems to have a lot of interesting ideas floating around but the ideas never really come together and in the end you can't help but feel disappointed. This isn't a horrible movie but at the same time you expect a lot more when Wes Craven is involved.
You pretty much have to give this a second review in terms of the 3-D. I must admit that I didn't want to watch a Craven film in 3-D but that's all that was playing around me. Those expecting stuff to jump off the screen are going to be disappointed and those who put down $12 or more dollars (like I did) for the 3-D are going to be extremely mad because there isn't any 3-D. Well, there are two small things that jump out at you in the entire movie and the rest of the thing is simply flat. In fact, during the movie you can take your glasses off and it's a 2-D print being shown. There was one other person in the theater with me and he actually watched the movie without the glasses on. I'm not sure how the studio is promoting this thing but there's no question this wasn't shot for 3-D but instead converted to it. This isn't a bad thing but to charge extra money for just a couple quick scenes is a major rip off so for this reason alone I'd recommend people to save their money and wait for DVD or try and catch a 2-D screening.
- Michael_Elliott
- Oct 7, 2010
- Permalink
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $25,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $14,744,435
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $6,842,220
- Oct 10, 2010
- Gross worldwide
- $21,500,813
- Runtime1 hour 47 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1