Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

oh_why_hello This film was not scary or creepy. It was a pathetic version of "chuckie", yet shorter. If you are looking for a decent horror movie, your not in the right area.It was an alright episode, but not if your looking for scary. It was unrealistic, more supernatural. Also quite bad acting if i must say. I would recommend, 'The haunting in Kenetticut'. Its scary, mind-controlling. It is far more advanced then this excuse of a horror. I watched it with a group of friend, you'll be looking round corners, closing curtains and leaving lights on. I leaves you with nightmares. I really think you should consider this as an alternative.

MARIO GAUCI Frankly, I had left this and SICK GIRL for last from the first "Masters Of Horror" series (though I missed out on Tobe Hooper's DANCE OF THE DEAD) because, not being the work of renowned directors, I did not expect much from them. However, both proved surprisingly rewarding – more so, in fact, than some entries by respected (and long-standing) genre exponents! Anyway, while the plot here is not exactly novel – a middle-aged couple make a pact with the devil to revive their beloved teenage son, the price being the life of 12 others to be carried out over a period of so many years on the occasion of their son's birthday. The initial sequence, revealing the heroine to be out-of-touch with both peers and family, was perhaps unnecessary, but I can see how it accentuated her subsequent feeling of loneliness and her attachment to the mysterious boy she encounters – attempting to commit suicide! – in the basement of the remote country-house to which the girl has been abducted. The back-story of the pact (with typically henpecked and doubtful male but a dedicated and ruthless female, given a masculine look to boot by her short-cropped hair) is depicted via a few stylized scenes; the appearance (and movement) of the monster in which the boy transforms in order to fulfill it, then, comes off as appropriately creepy. The overall tone of the episode is quite grim, but it manages to hold one's interest throughout – eventually contriving an ironic yet strangely moving denouement.

OttoJg14 The other reviewer must have watched a different version than I did? Also the obvious bias against the director is more than obvious! Most people don't give a hoot, or will even know or care that the director did "Fear.Com!" Taken as an installment in the Masters of Horror series, I consider this to be one of the best! I watch every horror/sci-fi/fantasy flick that comes out and this episode actually had me scared! The use of early silent era (Nosferatu, etc.,) skip-frame technique (that jerky movement: every 5th-6th frame) really works here and lends a superb atmosphere of the 'supernatural' to the object in question! The other reviewer had issues with this director being called a "Master of Horror"? Look at the bulk of work by the other directors in this series!! Yikes! Not what I call a brilliant body of work!! That doesn't mean they can't make a good short feature! I think some of the other directors best works are part of this series! I saw it on cable first..then bought it! A must see!!!

Poe-17 I love the "Masters of Horror" series and the opportunity it creates for experimental "little movies" for we who love horror and for the directors in question. This series has spawned several complaints about the "Masters" in the title. Maybe they could have chosen a better word for the world's retentive but in a society riddled with hype, I took the "Masters" with a grain of salt. I'd like to see a series of "Unknowns". I like the way different directors bring different nuances (and wild opposites)to the idea of a horror film.Which brings me to "Fair Haired Child". I know IMDb has lifted this one above the 5.0 middle but, you know what ... it didn't work for me. I couldn't get in the saddle. I loathed "Fear.Com" because it wasted an opportunity, I own "House on Haunted Hill" because of ... the house, not the tale. For tale, I also own the original B&W. I don't mean to pound Malone because I genuinely believe something is stirring there and maybe his "Parasomnia" will let it loose. I felt "FHC" tried to insert "art" into the movie. Horror films can go "art" but it is a syncronicity or "aftermath". Do the horror first. Time and audience (not critics)will determine if a horror film made the "art" level. It's a wobbly distinction at best. Trying to force it into a film is nearly a warranty that it ain't gonna happen. It's an afterward, not a strategy. Unless, of course, you genuinely are a "master" of horror. There aren't many. After riding the clichéd story to the revelation of the FHC, I said aloud "Oh, &*^%" because it was just a tremendous letdown. So, so buildup and way the wrong direction for FHC. All the above with a very pedestrian wrap up ... I wanted to but just couldn't.