Review #148: We Are Still Here (2015)

This review was originally written in 2021.

Gabe's 100 Bucket List Horror Films Review #3- We Are Still Here (2015)

I watched this movie a few years ago, and I even wrote a review for it (I remember arguing with a friend on Facebook about some of the issues I had). I ultimately didn't like it, but I don't remember much beyond that negative reaction, and I've heard so many people praise this film in the years since, so this time around I made sure to pay better attention and give it another shot.

Unfortunately, I still don't like this movie. I feel like it didn't do anything noteworthy, the characters' motivations don't make sense, and the plot feels like a half-baked episode of Supernatural (except the several episodes of Supernatural that dealt with this exact same plot still had more going for them than this feature-length movie). The premise is nothing new, yet incredibly muddled: a family moves into a new house, but unknown to them there are ghosts (?) that want to kill them (?) and the rest of the town (?) is in on it (?), giving the new family as a sacrifice to the house (?) in order to achieve some sort of goal (?).

I put a lot of question marks in there because there's a lot about this that is not explained, and/or doesn't make sense. The house needs the sacrifice, but the actual kills are made by the ghosts of the previous family (which are notably NOT the original homeowners, nor the progenitors of the curse)? The house needs a blood sacrifice, but apparently the multiple people that DO get killed in the house over the course of the film don't count? And apparently the ENTIRE town (at least, the twenty or so regulars at the local restaurant) is in on it, yet it's such a secretive matter that Dave McCabe straight-up murders the new waitress because she saw him at the restaurant or something? (He then also kills his wife, for... some reason?) And I still don't understand what the purpose of the sacrifice was (would something bad happen if there was no sacrifice, or does the sacrifice grant the town good fortune? It wasn't until the literal end credit sequence that I was even sure this sacrifice had any effect on the town at all) nor do I understand what part the main characters' dead son played in the story (if any). The plot was a huge mess of familiar-sounding tropes but none of it was explained to the point that I felt was needed.

And this is all on top of some amateurish technical issues too. One scene (which I recall complaining about after my first viewing way back when) has the four main characters at a table eating dinner, yet for some reason three of the four characters are shown on the left side of the screen talking towards the right (and the one person on the right was barely taking part in the conversation, so you end up with multiple people all individually looking offscreen in the same direction yet apparently talking to one another). The ghosts themselves are just normal people painted all black, with a few CGI embers added on in post-production and either a smoke machine on set or some CGI smoke added, depending on the scene. And the movie is apparently a period piece (taking place in the 60s?) but I don't see what this adds to the film except to allow for a couple jokes about how women aren't expected to drive cars. (Part of me wonders if, maybe they cast Monte Markham and then someone said, "Welp, no way anyone will believe this guy lives in a modern world, let's make it an old-timey movie instead.")

And this feels like kicking an undead horse, but I don't understand what the title is supposed to mean. Who is the "we" speaking? The burnt ghosts? That would make the most sense but I don't really see why they would be reminding someone of their existence, when all they really do in the movie is jump out and burn things. Even a change as simple as "They Are Still Here" would be a markedly better title, because it no longer implies that the ghosts are trying to get someone's attention.

In short, I just don't get what this movie thinks it was doing. The plot is a mess, the characters are lackluster, and with the exception of one good scene (the seance) this entire film can be passed on without missing anything. Maybe watch the seance on Youtube and then you're set.

Overall Rating: 3/10 Broken Rules of Filmmaking

Best Actor Slumming It In This Film: I knew the bartender looked familiar, but couldn't place her until I was looking this movie up on IMDB- Susan Gibney was better known as Leah Brahms from Star Trek: The Next Generation, where she gets creeped on by LaVarr Burton for two episodes!