I figure I'll get a "not a horror film" backlash for posting this here, but when you've got Wes Craven directing a "thriller" that eventually involves a madman with a knife, a distorted voice, and other comfortably conventional elements, then I think it's worth bringing up.
And when Wes Craven comes up with something this thoroughly entertaining in the same year that gave us CURSED, then that's MORE than worth bringing up.
I've been reading some more Craven-bashing lately--some people are mad at him for "selling out" once again and refusing to discuss (let alone revisit) LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT and THE HILLS HAVE EYES. Except... didn't he already DO those (and others) and EARN his stripes? Okay, the rest of the world took longer to get sick of the SCREAM business than we did, but should all that be on his shoulders exclusively? I might as well get steamed at Larry Cohen for writing PHONE BOOTH and CELLULAR instead of making a fourth IT'S ALIVE film.
Rest assured, Rachel McAdams and Cillian Murphy are top-drawer terrific in RED EYE. Some of it may be hokey, but it works as a thriller and I can't imagine anyone feeling that it either betrays the formula or skimps on the goodies.
For all the misery I endured from Craven and Williamson earlier this year, here's all the proof you need that we're still dealing with a fine director who only needs to avoid certain screenwriters for now...
