The Resident

A well acted film that unfortunately offers nothing new once the scene has been set. A third of the way into the film you can pretty much turn off and guess the rest. its a real shame too because there was an element of mystery to begin with which was stripped away far too early leaving only a predictable hour till the finish. Aside from that the acting is great, the tension is OK, although its not built upon enough, it seemed as if scenes of potentially great tension were cut short just to have action, which, in a horror film, isn't a smart move. There are a couple of great scenes when the 'horror' came not from the hunter but from the hunted, but overall it never really scares.

1. Professional woman (Hilary Swank) who's just been cheated on by her ex searches for a new apartment and just wants to move on in her life. She's a good heart surgeon but lonely.... 2. Caretaker (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) and his ancient Grandfather (Christopher Lee) let her a hugely spacious apartment at about a tenth of the normal rent.... 3. Swank begins to fall for the gentlemanly guy, but after almost consummating the relationship the audience discover (shock! horror!) that the guy's a creepy perv. He's fitted up her apartment with lots of spy holes and hidden entrances like any self respecting creepy perv would... 4. Caretaker seen early on in movie using a nail gun, not realising they usually come back to haunt you if you're a creepy perv - see Pacific Heights for reference.... 5. Methinks I spot a professional body double getting out of the bath. The camera is appropriately misted up/out of focus so the brief nudity is quite tasteful.... 6. Clause in Ms Swank's contract. "Camera must linger longingly over my client's every gesture and thought for at least 40% of the movie." 7. Clause in Mr. Lee's contract. "Client must not appear for more than 5 minutes in the movie, just like most of his other 200-odd screen appearances - see Dracula Prince of Darkness." 8. Swank's Loser ex reappears and in spite of being even creepier than Morgan's sad perv she promptly beds him. 9. Our heroine only drinks red wine, so it is left uncorked for Dean Morgan to add Demerol, etc....He's well screwed if she drank white...:) 10. Cell Phones that we are told have a signal problem in the building at the beginning of the movie, but work fine until Swank has to make a crucial phone call..... 11. Top heart surgeon takes about a fortnight to suspect she's being drugged every night. Tests her blood at the hospital. Guesses what Caretaker has been up to. Does not ring police. Does not tell anyone at all. Just rushes home. Nice one! 12. During the final confrontation nail-guns evil caretaker about 6 times. Always in a non-fatal area. Remember she's a surgeon.... There are a lot more. Actually I'm being a bit hard on The Resident, as it's not too badly made and put together, but I've included the above as a long-winded way of saying you've probably been here before, watching the same plot from a dozen or more other flicks. In truth, this is Hammer's least successful movie of their new era. What a pity Lee's character doesn't survive longer. I'd have had him trying to help Swank's character. Instead he gets offed pretty quickly. Shame as he's a fine actor. Still, hopefully the new Hammer will learn from this and develop. Wake Wood and Let Me In were much better.

Academy Award winner Hilary Swank should stay away from the horror/thriller genre. Hey, the girl can act. She's got two golden statues on display somewhere in her home that would argue anyone's theory to the contrary. But her two major forays into the genre with The Reaping (2007) and The Resident (2011) are both weak and embarrassing entries in an otherwise enviable work history. In The Resident, Swank plays Dr. Juliet Dremer, a New Yorker that moves into a new apartment after separating from her husband. The room is being rented by the good-looking Max played by Jeffrey Dean Morgan (Watchmen, The Losers) and the price is beyond enticing. But after moving in, Juliet realizes that it is truly too good to be true and Max and his elderly father (Christopher Lee is a throw away performance) are hardly the innocent warm-hearted individuals that they seemed at first introduction. With a standard 90-minute running time, there isn't much in The Resident to recommend. Swank does a commendable job in a paper thin character but the movie really hinges on Max and JD Morgan is neither convincing nor as creepy as he needs to be to elevate the film above a one-and-a-half star rating. As things begin to reveal themselves and the Max becomes more aggressive as the antagonist of the film, we just don't buy into the ideas represented in the script penned by director Antti Jokinen. Max's penchant for spying on Juliet and sneaking into her bedroom each night to hover, touch and exude creepiness just doesn't translate through Morgan's hunk-able looks. One could not help but remember why Anthony Perkins was so damn creepy in the Psycho films. He looked like a freak – an outsider that might be capable for such atrocities due to stark raving madness. Trying to believe that Jeffrey Dean Morgan would slip into Juliet's apartment to sniff and cradle her laundry is just not plausible. But maybe our biggest argument against The Resident is its use of sound. There must be six to ten jump scares in the film and they are all a result of an increased musical blast when unnecessary shocks are infused. We know that Jokinen wanted to take the best parts from Psycho, Pacific Heights and to some extent, Through the Eyes of a Killer, but this one just doesn't work on any attempted level. And when the final confrontation between the two leads occurs and needles and knifes are brandished, you just won't care what happens to any of them. And that is the biggest flaw a horror/thriller film can make. www.killerreviews.com

I have to admit i wasn't blown away by the film, but saying that it kept my attention from start to end and was watchable. Swank was excellent as the new resident of a seemingly cheap flat. She undoubtedly is a fantastic actress and she truly came alive in this film. You pretty much know whats going to happen about 30 minutes in, as this kind of voyeuristic thriller has been done on countless occasions. But it bounces along at a rapid pace and without the audience getting bored. Overall a good 7/10.

Guillermo Navarro's cinematography and a struggling cast cannot compensate for the weak script in this predictable thriller. I do not hold it against the picture that they went through other leads, although it is obvious that the role was not written for Swank specifically. She makes a solid effort at vulnerability, as per the part, despite the copiously fogged * scenes making it clear that this ex-Karate Kid and $M Baby could put most guys through a wall. And Christopher Lee is used well, if sparingly, though fans should not come in expecting a huge role for him. I did not, and was not disappointed. ***************************SPOILER ALERT****************************** But the film is packed with the kind of dialog in which characters literally declare their emotional state to the audience, "I am ___ , because ___." This picks up a little with the intrusion of a he said/she said on screen rewind of the events just seen, which are then replayed in montage so as to reveal the antagonist's back-story and motives in a manner more ham fisted even than the dialog. The rewind flashback is exceeded even by a facile, inverse, parallel use of guns near the open and ending shots. The score is adequate if derivative, with some droning bells and manipulated strings that match well with the early use of environmental sounds in the cityscape. Despite these many overplayed elements, Navarro's cinematography is pleasingly smart. A white on black color motif that shifts to red for effective foreshadowing, it helps relieve the series of lame jump-scares. Institutional colors at her work alternate with warm flesh tones for intimate interiors, and smooth use of the established apartment space with more interesting camera movement than your typical voyeur thriller. Morgan is also good, and it is promising to see him cast in Bornedal's upcoming film for Raimi's uneven Ghost House Pictures. But overall, this is a disappointing but not terrible film. Maybe hard for Hammer fans to take, as they seem to be harking back to earlier thriller/noir territory rather than more horrific or explicit films. The casting seems problematic here, and the use of Radcliffe in the upcoming Lady in Black remake is worrisome as a similar strategy. That film should at least have a better script, adapted by Jane Goldman, than this did. Hammer has a history of re-adapting classics, featuring actors for their name, and doling out the nudity - so it is pleasing to see this film as part of a move in that direction after the unambitious Let Me In. They do seem to be playing it overly safe with some casting choices, although perhaps these upcoming projects will push further against type. Hopefully, they can retain this level of technical gloss and apply it to more original or at least cleverly realized work.

I will keep this one short as it does not warrant the effort of a proper review. The characters are so basic and one dimensional you wont care and the plot is so predictable you really do not need to watch it...you can guess what happens pretty quickly. No attempt to explain the motive of what made the bad guy a "bad guy" which would of probably made his character a lot more interesting and maybe he would of been somewhat fearsome but generally he wasn't. The film borrows heavily from Psycho and is in no way compelling enough to keep attention for the entire film. I cannot understand the positive reviews this film is getting, who are these people?