I'd never heard of this, but Cary Elwes definitely caught my attention! The plot description seems to give him a ripe role: a failed director with a dark past now staging amateur productions. With a good script I bet he could've worked wonders. Why do you think it failed?

The short answer? As much as I hate to say it, because it just wasn't that good. Production values were minimal, as the budget was nearly nonexistent.

Or, more precisely, it may have been a good story, but the execution was poor.

The production team saved money by doing much of the interior shooting in a community theater building in a very small town. There was quite a lot of exterior filming in the surrounding wooded areas.

But as I said, true effort was put forth; it may have just been a skills issue at this point, as everyone involved (with the exception of Elwes) was, at the time, brand-new to the craft.

Cary Elwes was not short on work at the time, he certainly didn't need the project-- and I can't imagine he got paid much of anything. I am always amazed when an accomplished, established artist lends time to struggling newcomers.

I see that the film is available to view for free, with a link here on TMDB. At some point, I might revisit it.

@northcoast said:

Cary Elwes was not short on work at the time, he certainly didn't need the project-- and I can't imagine he got paid much of anything. I am always amazed when an accomplished, established artist lends time to struggling newcomers.

I bet that's the case, and maybe he saw something in the director or screenplay that he really believed in, even if it didn't materialize.

It brings to mind the famous example of Kirk Douglas who in the mid 50s discovered the then-unknown director Stanley Kubrick. Douglas believed in the project so much (Paths of Glory) that rumor has it he not only forewent half his salary but he raised most of the funding for the film. It paid off in a huge way, and we got the career of Stanley Kubrick.

Haunting in Cawdor...? Maybe not so historic. But if Elwes was indeed trying to help out an unknown filmmaker, props to him 👍👍

I'll probably give the film a whirls sooner or later. You can't beat free!

Watched it at 2am in a sleep deprived delirium, and thought it was pretty interesting… I got a bunch of questions though. More on that later.

Thanks to your review/warning I expected low budget production values so I wasn’t bothered by the minimalist presentation. You’re right, it seems like they basically just rented a barn and started filming. Ultimately though, I think the isolated location fits the story perfectly if I’m reading into it right.

Cary Elwes (“Lawrence”) delivered as always, and I was glad to see he wasn’t just a token cameo like a lot of indie horror flicks do with famous names. I thought the lead actress “Vivian” also did a good job with a deceptively tricky role: playing a character who’s not very expressive due to PTSD. I bet actors hate roles like that because they’re forced to act wooden. But she put enough personality into the performance to keep it interesting & suspenseful.

Where I felt a little cheated is in the story’s resolution itself which was ambitiously pulling together half a dozen different themes. I dunno if they came together tightly enough. But I admit a lot of the confusion was my fault, because afterwards when I rewatched some scenes it filled in a lot of the blanks. The story has a lot going on under the surface and that might be what attracted Elwes.

Main themes:

1. Macbeth - not just the “theater curse” but the theme of the Shakespeare play itself which is centered around Macbeth’s own PTSD & guilt at committing a rash murder. This draws a nice parallel with Vivian & her backstory as well as Lawrence & his.
2. Supernatural or hallucination? - This isn’t a full on supernatural assault like a zombie or vampire flick, but for almost 3/4 it dwells in that hazy territory where it could be a ghost story or there could be a rational explanation. (More on this in the spoiler section below.)
3. Alternate universes! - Sort of like Nightmare on Elm Street where he gets you when you fall asleep, or Poltergeist where they pull you into the tv set …but I’d say this is closer to the awesomely surrealistic (illogical?) ghost world in Phantasm if you know that oldie.
4. WTF happened at the end?? - Gotta admit my first reaction was confusion because I didn’t really get what happened to the “ghost” on stage or to Vivian in the final moments. But I went back & rewatched a few scenes and if my interpretation is correct, the ending is kinda badass.

So now let’s roll up our sleeves and figure out wtf happened.

——————————————————

SPOILERS BELOW

LIKE SERIOUSLY MAJOR SPOILERS

¡¡¡SPOILERS!!!

I thought it was pretty cool how for 3/4 of the movie we don’t know if there’s a real haunting or of it’s Vivian’s damaged mind, since we see she’s suffering from her own flashbacks as well as taking some mystery medication. Ultimately the haunting is real because the jealous ghost kills Brian, and that couldn’t have been Vivian’s imagination, even if the rest is. I think it was important for the film to have that tuning point so we could relax our guard and accept that Vivian isn’t imagining the whole thing; we can take it all literally for the whirlwind conclusion.

So now let’s jump right to the end. Vivian figures out that Jeanette is trapped in a weird alternate universe on the VHS tape where she, Jeanette, keeps getting murdered by a mysterious cloaked figure. By the way this is a really cool metaphor for PTSD - reliving a traumatic event that keeps getting replayed. The killer even tells her at the end “Because you keep playing the tape!”

Anyway, after all hell breaks loose, Vivian learns that her friend Roddy is the ghost of Lawrence’s dead son. Roddy had been in love with Jeanette, but Jeanette was hooking up with his father Lawrence. So Roddy killed Jeanette, disposed of her body so no one ever knew (she “ran away” thinks Lawrence), then hung himself from the theater rafters. Vivian decides to enter the VHS dream world and confront/kill Rodney with Macbeth’s dagger (in Shakespeare it becomes a “ghost dagger” which makes it kinda cool that it would be the only thing that can kill the ghost of Roddy).

She enters VHS world, Roddy is waiting to attack her, she drops the dagger, but then the ghost of Jeanette picks it up and kills Roddy, freeing herself from the nightmare loop and ending the story.

BUT THEN…!

We get 2 really interesting twists at the end. The first is while Vivian is unconscious in the hospital, she has a flashback to the first day at the barn. But it’s not her first day. The names being announced at roll call are different, and Lawrence is dressed differently. (So whose flashback is it?)

Secondly, in the last second she opens her eyes, and her eyes are green whereas they weren’t before.

Put these 2 things together and you realize she’s not Vivian anymore, it’s implied she’s someone else. Here’s where I went all the way back to the opening scene at the bus stop where Vivian meets Roddy as well as a weird girl who turns out to be Jeanette. Two ghosts. Jeanette tells Vivian that she’s been waiting for a long time (dual meaning: waiting for the bus & waiting to be freed from her purgatory). If I’m not mistaken, Jeanette has green eyes.

So am I right in assuming that the hospital flashback at the end was Jeanette’s memory? And that plus Vivian’s new green eyes would imply that the ghost of Jeanette had occupied or taken possession of Vivian? Is that what she was waiting for all this time?? 🤔🧐🤨

@rooprect said:

Thanks to your review/warning I expected low budget production values so I wasn’t bothered by the minimalist presentation. You’re right, it seems like they basically just rented a barn and started filming. Ultimately though, I think the isolated location fits the story perfectly if I’m reading into it right.

You're reading it right-- the location is meant to be an isolated work camp; if I remember correctly, the delinquents are supposed to get reduced sentences in exchange for doing some of their time at the camp. As for the rest of your analysis:

You put a lot more thought into it than I did. I think if the crew behind this could read your commentary, they'd be flattered beyond belief. A Haunting in Cawdor was a very obscure film, and I'm fairly certain that at least one if not more of the people who uploaded the film's info to TMDB were directly involved in its production; if so, maybe they will see it. If they do, rooprect, just know, that I am sure they will appreciate your insights.

I do agree that, in the end, there's probably no way the plot can be explained away as strictly a series of hallucinations; the film definitely contains a supernatural element. For some people, that's a bonus, for others, a drawback. But, as the saying goes, you can't please everyone.

For me, A Haunting in Cawdor was a 5 out of 10. Could've been a lot better, but also could've been a lot worse.

I'm thinking I'll add this film to my Fall/Winter 2025 - 2026 viewing schedule, and give it another viewing, perhaps around Halloween! ;)

@northcoast said:

I think if the crew behind this could read your commentary, they'd be flattered beyond belief. A Haunting in Cawdor was a very obscure film, and I'm fairly certain that at least one if not more of the people who uploaded the film's info to TMDB were directly involved in its production; if so, maybe they will see it. If they do, rooprect, just know, that I am sure they will appreciate your insights.

That would be so cool if the cast or crew stop by and confirm, deny or at least appreciate my thoughts. They're lucky that Macbeth is my favorite Shakespeare* so I immediately caught the parallels.

*between you & me it's the only Shakespeare I've read 😬

I do agree that, in the end, there's probably no way the plot can be explained away as strictly a series of hallucinations; the film definitely contains a supernatural element. For some people, that's a bonus, for others, a drawback. But, as the saying goes, you can't please everyone.

Right, and I think the real-or-imagined question is something that every horror film wrestles with. Whichever way they go, I like it when a film chooses one side or the other. I despise a film that leaves us with It-Was-All-A-Dream-----Or-Was-It?

This film seems to dwell in that ambiguity, which is kinda cool as it explores the psychology of PTSD, but ultimately it takes a stand at the end. I just remembered another strong indication that the ghost was real: At the end, Vivian is covered in blood but the medics say they can't find any lacerations on her (i.e. it's the ghost's blood).

Another totally unrelated subplot that I found really interesting and well done is the question of Cary Elwes character Lawrence. We know he had a history of affairs with his leading ladies, ultimately culminating in his son's suicide. Did he truly learn his lesson, and is he now reformed? Or as the ghost accuses him, is he once again just trying to get into Vivian's pants? It's ambiguous for most of the film, and even a bit creepy, but ultimately in his final emotional scene Elwes delivers the moneyshot. I believe that scene shows how much the suicide destroyed him and that he's truly changed.

For me, A Haunting in Cawdor was a 5 out of 10. Could've been a lot better, but also could've been a lot worse.

I'm thinking I'll add this film to my Fall/Winter 2025 - 2026 viewing schedule, and give it another viewing, perhaps around Halloween! ;)

Definitely a great one for the Halloween playlist! This is one of those films that's probably even better the 2nd time. Thanks for bringing it up and mentioning it's free, otherwise I never would've enjoyed the experience.

@rooprect said:

*between you & me it's the only Shakespeare I've read 😬

No judgement here, rooprect. I suspect that the number of people who say they really like Shakespeare without having actually read his work, is enormous. For my part, I've only ever read Romeo and Juliet (love it) and Titus Andronicus (also really like it; interestingly, many Shakespeare purists will try to argue that TA wasn't really his-- it is considered by many to be nothing but an exploitation piece from start to finish. But, in my opinion, TA was just Shakespeare being very very naughty-- many artists, be they writers, musicians, or filmmakers --will often just go off the rails for the adventure of it, and then return to their more "respectable", regular work).

Also, since Shakespeare is so embedded in the culture of the English-speaking world, I think that not having read all the material can be somewhat excused; even if one has not actually read much of his work, you cannot help but be exposed to all the phraseology, so prevalent is it in society.

I'm thinking I'll add this film to my Fall/Winter 2025 - 2026 viewing schedule, and give it another viewing, perhaps around Halloween! ;)

Definitely a great one for the Halloween playlist! This is one of those films that's probably even better the 2nd time. Thanks for bringing it up and mentioning it's free, otherwise I never would've enjoyed the experience.

Glad I could be of introduction, rooprect!

Weirdly, despite its smaller user-base, I think TMDB in many ways is more effective at introducing people to unfamiliar films/TV shows than that [other much larger movie site that formerly had message boards] was; perhaps the smaller pool of people actually helps, in this regard.

@northcoast said:

@rooprect said:

*between you & me it's the only Shakespeare I've read 😬

No judgement here, rooprect. I suspect that the number of people who say they really like Shakespeare without having actually read his work, is enormous. For my part, I've only ever read Romeo and Juliet (love it) and Titus Andronicus (also really like it; interestingly, many Shakespeare purists will try to argue that TA wasn't really his-- it is considered by many to be nothing but an exploitation piece from start to finish. But, in my opinion, TA was just Shakespeare being very very naughty-- many artists, be they writers, musicians, or filmmakers --will often just go off the rails for the adventure of it, and then return to their more "respectable", regular work).

Also, since Shakespeare is so embedded in the culture of the English-speaking world, I think that not having read all the material can be somewhat excused; even if one has not actually read much of his work, you cannot help but be exposed to all the phraseology, so prevalent is it in society.

I'm thinking I'll add this film to my Fall/Winter 2025 - 2026 viewing schedule, and give it another viewing, perhaps around Halloween! ;)

Definitely a great one for the Halloween playlist! This is one of those films that's probably even better the 2nd time. Thanks for bringing it up and mentioning it's free, otherwise I never would've enjoyed the experience.

Glad I could be of introduction, rooprect!

Weirdly, despite its smaller user-base, I think TMDB in many ways is more effective at introducing people to unfamiliar films/TV shows than that [other much larger movie site that formerly had message boards] was; perhaps the smaller pool of people actually helps, in this regard.