Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark

Whenever Guillermo del Toro is involved with horror, my ears tend to perk up, even if it's only as a producer or screenplay contributor. 

His version of horror is a true vision in more cases than not and, even when it doesn't totally land, you're never left faulting the atmosphere or the design in the slightest.

With Hobbs & Shaw now out, August has turned into a bit of a duldrum movie month, with kids headed back to school - likely still talking about scenes from Endgame - and the next truly big film not happening until early September with It: Chapter II (very excited for this one BTW). Sure, there are some ones that I'll see between now and then, but general audiences are likely not prioritizing movie watching for the next several weeks. 

Strangely placed in August vs. a prime October setting, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark seems almost like a discouraged "dump" to get the movie off their hands. Seriously though, the movie is even set during Halloween + Guillermo del Toro...why are we seeing this movie now? Regardless, I've apparently become a fan of horror because I was semi-eager to see this after some positive word of mouth from the right people. Having never read the children's novel, I was immensely curious how they'd combine all of these into a narrative and, let's be real, just how terrifying can a film of children's stories be? 

As it turns out, the answer to each of those pondering thoughts is pretty distinct and Scary Stories, for all the generic-ness it has going for it, is still decently entertaining and there are more than a few scenes where del Toro was clearly at play that are far elevated above the other material. In hindsight, I suppose the weakest part of the film is the narrative, but it does get points for effectively stringing the stories together. Some may be disappointed to know that these are all "new" scary stories because the book is "writing" new ones. So if you had a favorite, it likely didn't make its way onto the screen. And the narrative, while being able to explain how these could all exist together, is still cliche-ridden and ultimately provides a "meh" conclusion that threatens to steal one of the best ideas/parts of The Haunting of Hill House (until it doesn't). I'm sure this isn't the first time someone has suggested it, but rather than being another teenager-filled horror tale in a specific time period (1959 -- which is never really explained why it's then other than a need for a lack of technology), this could have been a great anthology TV series on Netflix, HBO, etc. with del Toro as a producer and maybe director of a few episodes. 

Tough zit the size of a golf ball! Use Proactiv!

Gee...I wonder who helped
with creating this scene...

But that's what could have been and what we've got is still good/great during the scenes of horror, and totally average whenever something scary isn't happening. Unlike other horror films, Scary Stories gets the added benefit of having multiple monsters that look, act, and stalk differently. It was one of my favorite moments in the film, guessing what the newest horror would be and how it would play out. Surprisingly, the only "lowlights" of this whole process were the monsters in the finale, partly because of their heavy CGI where others were practical and partly because the film was starting to overstay its welcome by that point. Beforehand however, they were well designed and truly scary with the film using jump-scares to good effect, and at times a healthy dose of atmospheric horror. The much-advertised scarecrow-man builds a lot of tension and is scary (while also giving you the first dose of the film's not-so-PG13 violence) while the other advertised "zit" scene is equal parts disgusting, gross-out, equally built on tension, and shocking. Another setup, the "red room" is probably the best and most talented scene in the whole film with a clearly del-Toro designed "creature" in a clever, visually stunning and captivating moment that's easily the film's peak. 

In that sense, it's a shame that more thought and talent wasn't given to the entirety of the film because with the creature design and horror elements being so strong, there was potential for this film to be a huge surprise (some really funny added humor could have helped too). Ultimately, you're left with about what you'd expect with a so-so film that "ties" the stories together where the highlights are most definitely the horror and creature design elements which, to be fair, take up a significant portion of the runtime.

CONS

• The scenes that exist between horror elements are just okay. The cast is okay, the talent behind the camera is okay, the music is okay, etc. etc. 
• The ending, while somewhat clever, goes on too long and the final creature(s) are overly CGI in a film that had been finding success with mostly practical effects
• Needlessly sets up a sequel and overstays its welcome just a tad
• Not affecting final score but why are we getting this in August again?!

PROS

• When the horror elements kick in, they're effective. The film has some effective jump scares and scene-chewing horror to indulge in
• Creature design thanks (likely) to GdT. Each is unique and part of the thrill of the film is not knowing what's going to come next
• The narrative, though forced, does tie these all together in a logical way where it makes sense in that classic "horror" sense (i.e. a demon is doing something bad)
• I found the "Red Room" scene to be one of the more memorable I've seen all year and a moment of elevated talent within the film

Rath's Review Score | 7/10