Product description

The Girl Next Door [2007] (REGION 1) (NTSC)

Price: £6.37
Average customer rating: 3.5

Binding : DVD
EAN : 0013131559699
Label : Anchor Bay
Manufacturer : Anchor Bay
Publisher : Anchor Bay
Release date : 2007-12-04
Title : The Girl Next Door [2007] (REGION 1) (NTSC)
Actor : Array
Format : Array
Languages : Array
Number of items : 1
Original release date : 2007-01-01
Region code : 1
Running time : 91
Studio : Anchor Bay
Theatrical releaseDate : 2007
MPN : DV15596

Customer reviews

review by: date: 2008-09-27 rating:

Disturbing
I am a horror fan and have seen everything out there gore-wise so I'm pretty much unshockable but this film is different. It's that rare movie that doesn't resort to gore to make you feel horror, instead it portrays a horrifying true life situation that escalates with an ever increasing sense of dread. In that sense it is not a horror film but a drama which horrifies. The performances of the two leads as Meg and David are very believable and you really feel the shock and helplessness as the drama unfolds. The rest of the young performers, mostly portraying the deranged Ruth's family, have a cold and disturbing sociopathy that works really well to repulse the viewer. I don't feel it is exploitative or disturbing that a film like this is made with child actors, you have to remember that movies are put together shot by shot and created by actors who know very well that what they are doing is not real particulalry when you're surrounded by 20 people with lights and cameras, eating sandwiches and drinking. The fact is when it's put together the effect it has on the viewer is nothing like the effect it has on the actors who had work hard to make it happen and like most kids had a blast. It's very well put together and the tension builds with such subtleties as the low rumbling that creeps into the soundtrack whenever Ruth's insideous actions begin, this helps the movie do everything it can to unsettle you. In fact the feeing of dread that slowly built in me during the course of it actaully had me moaning "No no no" at the realisation of what was about to happen in the film's most shocking scene. I feel I had to knock off one star because I felt the reasons behind Ruth's family disfunction and her sickness are never really explained and because by the end of it I just felt horribly depressed. Kudos to Daniel Manche as David who emoted really well the confusion of someone out of his depth and almost paralised to act and taking upon himself a responsibility that would haunt him for the rest of his life. Not an easy watch but outstanding if you want to see something that is challenging which will effect you deeply. Recommended films with a similar theme: "Mean Creek", "Twelve And Holding", and with older teens "Bully" all highly rated on Amazon.

review by: A New Yorker date: 2008-03-13 rating:

This is a great film but this movie just piss me off
Talk about being numb to your seat. Even though I've been warned I was still angered by it. I never cuss and fuss so much towards a film in my life. As a parent I was totally appalled of all the actions that took place towards the sisters. Just because your (Ruth) life ended up bad doesn't mean you can take it upon a child. She's lucky I didn't bump into her in the streets but fortunately enough she got what she deserves. In the beginning of this film, it revolves around David (played as an adult by William Atherton, the seminal 1980s), who after seeing a man hit by a car, recalls his youth and meeting Meg Loughlin (Blythe Auffarth), a 13 year old daughter of a gypsy left with her mother under the care of Ruth (Blanche Baker) and her sons. The young David (played by Daniel Manche) grows fond of his neighbors and Ruth, as she lets the boys drink beer, smoke cigarettes, and give them whatever they want. However, Ruth grows spiteful of Meg and her younger sister Susan (Madeline Taylor), crippled from polio. She starts with verbal abuse, and it soon turns into something more violent, as Ruth and her sons tie up Meg in the basement, and allow the neighborhood kids to torture her with cigarette burns, rape, and branding hot needles into her skin. David seems helpless, but slowly tries to find the courage to help her.

The film starts out like any coming of age film, where David meets his new neighbors and the first act shows David's induction into Ruth's house. The second act begins the torture, and the third act is David's belated reaction to do something about it. It is successful on the filmmakers to have me react so strongly every time Ruth and her sons appeared on screen, because I know that's what they are going for. However, I felt that the process they used felt more exploitative than most. It shows in a scene before Meg's torture, where Ruth punishes Susan by dropping her pants and spanking her with a toilet bowl cleaner. We only see a view from below the bed, where Susan lies, but to see her braces fall to the ground as each slap is heard just felt sickening. The slow torture of Meg was very unpleasant to watch, and just went to a level so far it became exploitative. I know this really happened, but it didn't need to go to that level to show the point they needed to make. The director did state that the kids weren't there for explicit scenes but they were all there for Meg's first scene at the basement.

Blythe Auffarth undeniably gave a brave performance as Meg, giving one of the most gut wrenching performances I've seen in a film. It is her suffering that sells the film and she succeeds admirably. Not every actress would do this role, and she should be applauded. Blanche Baker is such an evil (BEEP) as Ruth that she just made my stomach churn at her presence. Her sons were all played well as spoiled brats enjoying the evil acts they are doing, showing that children can prove to be as cruel as adults. These kids make Stewie from FAMILY GUY look like Opie Taylor. William Atherton is good as the adult David, but his scenes feel out of place and don't really provide any resolution. I've always liked Atherton as an actor, and I wish he had more to do. Some of the reviewers here along with my friends at Amazon had stated that "The Girl Next Door" is the most shocking for 07' and probably for the decade which I too agree upon. It's well directed, brilliantly acted (by some), and well written, but overall it's a film not made for the right reasons, and made to exploit your anger at the shocking elements of the film rather than bring this harrowing subject matter to the attention it deserves. They say the book is better then the movie, sorry I doubt I'll ever pick that up.

review by: date: 2008-01-14 rating:

Hard To Watch In Places Be Warned
I am an avid film and especially a horror fan. I was recommend this and had no idea what the film would be about at all. I have to say that

seeing the young girl beinf systematically abused and tortured by her nut job aunt made me very uneasy and I actually found it difficult to watch in places "blowtorch Scene" All the characters are played very

well especially the Aunt who is totally off her head. My only concern with this would be watching it with my other half as i think woman may

find it difficult to sit through without feeling very uneasy. All in all I would recommend the film to people to watch althopugh I thought the ending was a bit of a let down but hey you cant win them all and she certainly didn't

review by: The Angry Welshman date: 2008-01-12 rating:

Harrowing
I never read the book, so for me the film had no expectations. Which is a good thing. The film makers are given a certain amount of time to capture the story, where as a book will always be granted the luxury of time. Its unfair to compare films with books because of this. A previous reviewer says its a pointless film. Does this not apply to the book it was adapted from, for which they had so much praise?
Anyway, the film is gut wrenching. The acting is difficult for such a young cast in their roles so they can be forgiven for their lack of oscar winning perfomances. The actresses playing Meg and Ruth do deserve oscars, as they were entirely convincing in their parts.
The story focuses on a two girls who lose their parents in a car accident and are forced to live with their evil aunt. The story is told from the point of David, in flashback to the fifties. David is the kid living next door to the two girls and their evil aunt. The story starts slow and develops the relationship between David and Meg, the older of the two girls. Also we see the beginnings of Ruths hatred of the girl who is everything she isn't. The neighbourhood kids all hang out around their house and what starts as a simple childrens confession game, quickly escalates into the mindless torture of Meg at the hands of her Aunt and the neighbourhood kids. What makes it so difficult to watch is the fact that by the time the worst scenes start to take place, you actually feel an emotional attachment to her. Unlike other films featuring torture scenes eg. Hostel, Reservoir Dogs etc, these are low key and have greater emphasis on the psychological element involved. Anyone seeking buckets of blood will be disappointed, although they are are graphic enough for us to wince at.
We feel how powerless David is and question how much a young boy can do to help the girl he cares about. Everything he tries, seems to fail. You will find yourself shouting at the screen in frustration at his inaction, and any girls or women in the audience may cry or wince at one particular scene.
Anyone who doesn't feel a thing while watching this film is in need of therapy for sociopathic tendencies. It rips your heart out and stays with you long after the credits have stopped rolling. Certainly not one to be watched on a date or if your in a state of depression, but well worth seeing at some point. Disturbing stuff.

review by: date: 2007-12-27 rating:

Awful
I reviewed the book this film was adapted from because it really messed me up. The book crawled under my skin and made me cry and throw up and it didn't leave me alone for about 3 years. When I was given the opportunity to watch the film, I desperately tried to convince myself not to, but morbid fascination drew me to it, and I prepared myself to get messed up to an even greater degree. It's with great pleasure and relief that I say the film adaptation was appalling. Don't misunderstand, the film was still dark, but next to the book, it was virtually an irrelevance.

It gets progressively worse, obviously, and the penultimate scene where Ruth uses a blow torch on Meg in an area that will prevent her ever becoming sexually excited is genuinely harrowing, but the film itself isn't worthy of your time. The story is, of course, horrifying; the aunt - played by Blanche Baker - is absolutely despicable, and the progression of the story is still awful, and painful. But the adaptation in and of itself is pointless. The acting isn't great (although, Daniel Manche as David, desperate to do the right thing, but ultimately powerless, is a revelation and someone to look out for in the future) and the story is given no depth whatsoever. It feels like one minute Meg has arrived, and then the degeneration happens almost instantly. Meg's death at the end is heart-breaking, but Ruth's demise deviates from the book, and is completely underwhelming. There's no satisfaction or justice and, ultimately, the film goes out with a whimper. Which implies prior to that the film reaches a level *above* whimper. It really doesn't.

One scene is unnecessarily graphic, when it comes to the spanking of the very young sister. Equally, there's one scene involving full nudity of Meg that didn't need to be included. Those two scenes do raise some serious questions as to who the film-makers were trying to appeal to.

For the most part, it's poorly acted; it's shallow with none of the characters being given any depth that pulls you in emotionally, and the scenes that *do* grab your throat are disgusting. I can only assume that in the wake of films like Saw and Hostel, "torture porn" has become something of a movie meme, and someone somewhere thought they'd be able to cash in nicely with this adaptation. If that is why they adapted it, if they adapted it hoping to tap into the same primal part of us that Saw and Hostel reach, they failed miserably. If they made it into a film hoping we'd learn something from it, or come away from it asking questions, they failed miserably. If they made it into a film simply in order to make an accomplished piece of cinema, they failed miserably. Whatever the intention was - and for the life of me, I can't work out what it would be - they failed miserably.

This film has no point, no lesson to teach and no redeeming quality. It isn't visceral enough to satisfy horror fans; it isn't intelligent or thorough enough to satisfy people with an interest in the psychology of abuse, and it isn't good enough to satisfy cinematic aficionados. Watching it is a waste of time and for that, I am honestly grateful.

Similar products

Inside [2007] (REGION 1) (NTSC)
Frontier(s) [2007] (REGION 1) (NTSC)
Rec [2007]
Frontiers [2007]
The Lost [2006] (REGION 1) (NTSC)

Similar categories