Crimson Peak // Mia Wasikowska, Tom Hiddleston {Movie}

Why I'm watching
I won't say Tom Hiddleston wasn't a major draw, but it's also directed by Guillermo del Toro, and the trailer looks absolutely gorgeous.

Where I saw the movie
Local cinema, after dinner... somewhere. This was less than a week ago, how have I forgotten where we ate?! Bill's Pizza?

Expectations
I've seen it marketed as both horror and Gothic romance, so a mix of the two. The house (mansion) looks creepy and gorgeous. No idea about the plot, though.

So how was it?

"Gothic horror/romance" was spot-on. The movie follows Edith (Mia Wasikowska), a young, rich, high-society American woman who wants to become an author. While visiting her father's office, she meets and becomes entangled with Thomas (Tom Hiddleston), a British inventor looking for investor capitol, and his sister Lucille (Jessica Chastain).

The rest is either spoilers, or mostly belongs in the 'favorites' section.

Recommendation
Great for horror fans who don't mind some romance, and don't need a ton of evil/gore/etc. Great for romantic drama fans who don't mind violence and gore. Not great if you're expecting a complicated plot -- you'll figure this one out quickly, and get irked when it continues to act mysterious.

There was more gore than I expected, but it's not just gore for the sake of gore. 

Feels
Gothic. Horror. Romantic. A hint of video-game.

Favorites
Edith blew. it. out. of. the. water. She's confident without getting anywhere close to "spunky," "sassy," or defensive; she's a female author without coming across as a nerdy social recluse; she was clearly born with a silver spoon in her mouth, and it's neither ignored nor whinged about. She isn't perfect, but makes reasonably smart choices. She kicks a reasonable amount of ass against a reasonable opponent. Brilliant. This is a strong female hero.

The set, of course.

I also love the interplay of British and American characters. Edith's father (Jim Beaver) is pure distilled American self-made nouveau riche, set against a British baronet in decline. The Americans' indulgent confusion about his title is adorable. Casting was perfect, especially for Edith, her father, Lucille, and the random socialites. Alan (Charlie Hunnam) was a little blah, but then again, I think he was supposed to be.

I don't know what department is responsible -- set design? casting? wardrobe? lighting? -- but you really got a feel for the era... it didn't feel like a bunch of actors trotting about in period costume.

I have... feelings... about the waltz scene, but I'm not sure if it's favorite or least favorite. I'll consider it favorite, because it seemed historically accurate, wasn't super awkward, and they clearly consulted a professional; the candle metaphor was a dead give-away.

Least favorites
Nothing really stuck out, but I was left with a sense that it could have been better. The ghosts weren't scary or mysterious enough, and (gasp) I was actually a little disappointed with Hiddleston. Then again, that's partly my fault: I read that Benedict Cumberbatch backed out, so I spent the whole movie noticing how much more suited he would be for the role. More on that...

So what did I really think?

Click "read more"... spoiler filter disengaged!

I'm not a brilliant, world famous director, but...

The ghosts straddled the line between gory, scary, and friendly.. so they fell flat on all three. Every time one showed up, my reaction was something like "Oh. Aaah, ghost! Oh. Wait, what's it doing? Aaah, where is it!? Oh, it's right there. Is it... trying to communicate? Why do they all have long fingers, that's strangely specific...?"

Because I recently complained that someone wouldn't give specifics for improvement:

• Edith (and the audience) should have experienced a progression of OMGHOLYCRAPSCARYAAAAH to aaaahscary-- wait, what's it doing? to finally realizing ooh, this one's trying to help! Instead, each ghost was trying to be all three at once.
• The moments leading up to the ghosts -- fantastic! Perfect! Scary as hell! But then they actually show up. This great tension and suspense turns into gore and predictable jump scares.
• The CGI wasn't terrible, but it it was probably the biggest problem. The ghosts looked clean, like moving sculptures -- not dead, not dirty, not suffering, not human. And what was with the long fingers?! You die, and your fingers get long? 
• Alan also noticed that they're color-coded -- some black, some red, some white, with no real explanation. Maybe they're normally black, but the ones murdered on Crimson Peak are red? Is love a factor? Why are Edith's mother and Lucille black, but Thomas is white? Are they like chameleons? Forget why; they shouldn't be so well defined that each one had an obvious color. 

Hiddleston is a great actor. I'm a big fan. I just wish I hadn't read anything about Cumberbatch, because this role was practically made for him. I'm not saying Hiddleston did a bad job -- he didn't. Cumberbatch just would have been better.

• When Edith's father takes an immediate disliking to Thomas... it's just not realistic. Hiddleston can do earnest good guy and Loki's up to some shit. Cumberbatch can pull off inexplicably irritating like nobody's business. 
• When Thomas colludes to fake Alan's death, it's surprising, but it's not the right kind of surprise. It wasn't a matter of whether he would save Edith; it was a matter of how he would save Edith. Even when Hiddleston is conflicted, you can see two clear sides (and guess which side he'll choose). Cumberbatch is capable of this multifaceted, creepy, broken, sort-of-asshole, sort-of-sweetheart, eight-billion-things-going-on depth; you really don't know what's going on in his head, and you can see him honestly edging towards petulance, selfishness, evil, and insanity. 

Also there were several weird (unintentional?) references: Alan's Arthur Conan Doyle book, the east wind, Cumberland.

I wonder why Cumberbatch backed out. According to IMDb trivia, del Toro did some rewrites after recasting; I wonder what changed!?