“I’ll make you famous again.”
I’ve only recently realized that some people don’t rewatch movies. Or reread books. That for some people entertainment or information is a one-and-done process. It’s never been that for me, so I was flabbergasted at the revelation. Maybe it’s because I grew up at a time where there were simply fewer options for entertainment. I distinctly remember meeting up with other kids in the neighborhood to exchange summaries of the previous night’s TV episodes. Some kids only watched ABC shows, some CBS and others NBC. Between us all we could keep up with the stories until summer when, if we were lucky, we’d catch the re-runs and see the episodes for ourselves.
Cable changed that, and being able to rent movies changed it even more. Nowadays streaming generally means you can catch almost anything at all whenever you want to (if you’ve got the scratch), and there are so many options that you could literally watch nothing but new shows and movies every day for the rest of your life. (Our new frustration is having seasons of shows or series of films split amongst multiple services.)
The point I’m trying to get to is that I DO watch things multiple times. In the case of some of my favorite films I’ve watched them enough that I’m well into double digits. It’s a rare thing if I don’t rewatch a film or series that I like. It’s not the same as the initial experience, but it’s like visiting an old friend. Comfortable and generally a good time.
There ARE exceptions, and I never know when that’s going to be the case. I’m not talking about movies or series that I didn’t like – while I sometimes rewatch those to see if my assessment still holds, I’m generally okay with not watching things like Battlefield Earth more than once. No, I’m talking about things that I enjoyed. Often things that I really enjoyed. I think I get worried that I’ll have a different experience. That it won’t be as good as I remember. That I’ll ruin it, if I see it again. These are usually horror movies, for some reason. It’s not really conscious, I’ll just suddenly realize it’s been years since I watched a film.
A long, typically rambling way to say that I haven’t revisited Sinister since I first saw it, and I think that’s why. I enjoyed it a lot. I mean, I’d say it was one of my favorite horror films of the last couple of decades. Let’s see if I ruined it by watching it again.
The Medium
I have the 2012 Blu-ray of Sinister from Summit Entertainment. It looks great and has a decent selection of extras, including two commentary tracks. You can usually find it for fairly cheap (there’s a used copy on Amazon for $3.50 at the moment). For streaming options, Sinister is available for subs on Max and can be purchased or rented via AppleTV, Amazon, Fandango at Home and Microsoft.
The Movie
Sinister opens with a murder that appears to be shot on 8mm film. We see a group of people with nooses around their necks who are slowly (excruciatingly slowly) hung. We’ll see this scene again, in more detail, and it’s a harbinger of some of the most effective parts of the film.
After that we’re introduced to true crime writer Ellison Oswalt (Ethan Hawke) and his family. Wife Tracy (Juliet Rylance), son Trevor (Michael Hall D’Addario) and daughter Ashley (Clare Foley). Ellison, it turns out, is working on a new true crime book based on murders that happened in the very house his family is moving into. (Well, in the backyard, but this is a distinction that makes about as much difference to me as it does to Tracy when she finds out.) Ellison’s first book was a success, but his subsequent releases haven’t done as well. He’s in desperate need of a blockbuster and hopes that this new crime will provide the inspiration for a hit.
I’m never really sure how to take stories in which writers are the main protagonist. Stephen King has returned to that particular well a few times, with It, Secret Garden, The Dark Half and Misery for instance. As a sometimes writer myself, it can feel a little self-indulgent. They often fall into two categories – the person with the unique perspective that allows them special insight, or the half-cracked fanatic, unable to see his own actions and emotions clearly. Director (and writer) Scott Derrickson handles things deftly enough that it didn’t really bother me this time around, though I think Ellison falls pretty clearly into one of those two categories.
Ellison seems like a decent enough guy, even if he’s hiding the true nature of this current project from his wife. While there are some tensions – no kid likes moving to a new town and school – they seem like a good family. They get along, and the actors do a good job of conveying that personal warmth that makes the family dynamic work. Soon enough Dad has to get to work, though, and that’s when things start getting creepy.
Really creepy.
While Ellison has a good start with the book and the murders that took place at the house – the entire family was killed except the youngest daughter, who is missing – his breakthrough comes when he finds a projector and film reels in the attic. The reels are all labelled with domestic titles like Pool Party ’66, BBQ ’79 and Family Hanging Out ’11. They are not, however, simple home movies of domestic bliss. They all start off that way. They all end in death.
Family Hanging Out ’11 turns out to be the scene we saw at the beginning of the film. The slow hanging of an entire family. The other films are the same – a group drowning, the burning of a family in a car. They’re all horrific and obviously shot by the murderer or murderers. Ellison is horrified and intrigued and – in the end – unable to call the cops right away. He may have found evidence of a new serial killer, you see, and part of him can only imagine how amazing this will all be for his book…
The home movies are the best parts of the film for me. Yes, there’s plenty of other scary crap that’s going to happen. Ellison will see a symbol that reappears in the films. And there’s a distorted figure there as well. Stuff happens in the house and his son has night terrors. Family tension increases and someone is watching them. All good. All creepy.
But those damn films are disturbing. The idea of snuff films always creeps me out (maybe this is why I still haven’t watched my copy of The Poughkeepsie Tapes), and these are extremely well done. None more so than Lawn Work ’86, which is perfectly set up with timing, imagery and sound for one of the greatest jump scares I’ve ever had in a film. I honestly think that split second is why I’ve held off on watching the film again. It’ll never catch me quite the same way, and it was so damn good. And it’s still good. Just not as much as that first time.
(Kane did a “That Scene” post for this element back in 2020, if you want to spoil yourself.)
The movie veers closer and closer to a supernatural horror film after a certain point, and if I’m honest I don’t enjoy the film quite as much once this aspect moves to the forefront. It’s still entertaining and spooky – and Vincent D’Onofrio makes a fun appearance as an occult specialist – but nothing else in the film is as horrifying as those home movies. In fact I think the film could have been stronger if nothing had been explained. If the antagonist was never defined, and we were left wondering what, exactly, happened to these people and why.
There IS, however, something causing all the terror, and it will haunt Ellison and his family – and us – long after they leave the house.
The Bottom Line
While a rewatch didn’t ruin Sinister for me, I did find that my enjoyment of it was somewhat diminished. That scene from Lawn Work ’86 was so damn good that I think my first experience of it colored my perception of the entire film. It’s still a damn good horror movie, and I’ll put it in the top 10 horror movies of the 2010s any time, but I could have done without the explanations. If you haven’t seen it before, definitely check it out – it’s awesome. And if you haven’t seen it in a while, it’s still worth a rewatch, even if it doesn’t quite live up to your memory of it.
