Even to those unacquainted with the horror genre, Fair-Haired Child still strikes a familiar chord in the minds of those who were children once: the concept of the film reminds us of the sorts of fairy-tales and ghost stories we would shudder about around the campfire when we were naïve enough to believe those sorts of things could exist. We can’t speak for every viewer by saying that Child will make you believe again, but the ethical implications scattered throughout scare us more than this film’s boogeyman-of-choice does. Of course, a little imagination helps, too.

The plot starts out Grimmly enough. (Yes, I know how bad that pun was. Put the gun down…) Tara, a high school student, suffers under the scrutiny of her typically judgmental classmates as many budding individualists do. Her shyness and apparent interest in fantasy—as indicated by her drawings—makes her further estranged from other high schoolers. On her way home, a van hits her. The driver knocks her out, then tosses her into the trunk. Tara wakes up in a strange building where a woman claiming to be a nurse interrogates her. As the nurse begins to ask her increasingly odd questions (“Were you baptized?” “Have you had sexual intercourse?”) Tara realizes that she’s trapped in a mansion far from home and tries to flee. The “nurse” and the driver from before catch her and throw her into their basement. Down there, she finds a mute boy named Johnny who communicates by writing in the thick dust on the floor. Together, they desperately search for a way out of the basement before the “fair-haired child” that killed the children before them wakes up. Along the way, their captors (Anton and Judith) reveal their motives as the parents of a drowned son who they are trying to resurrect using the devil’s power.

For those who haven’t seen Child, to say that it’s scary would be a matter of taste, as with all things deemed “scary” or “unscary” by apparently well-knowing critics. A horror film can be “scary” in different ways, using techniques and subgenres such as psychological horror, atmosphere, and gore, leaving the decision as to whether the movie is frightening or not up to the viewer’s idea of what they find “scary.” The demon in Child employs body horror a la Jacob’s Ladder in its almost convulsive movements, and the fetus-like (or rather, as you’ll hear people say, Rubber Johnny-esque) deformations of its hydrocephalic head and glowing bulbous eyes add to its repulsive appearance. Though there is a bit of CGI for the parts that need it, the demon itself is created with some excellent make-up and a mask, the illusion of twitching limbs achieved by cutting or speeding up frames of the film. A kind of psychological horror plays a part in the tense, claustrophobic depths of the basement where Tara has little space to run or hide from what stalks her. Surprisingly, the gore remains low-key even for a show that claims to be uncensored (*cough*Imprint), and the climactic moment of violence will only drive off those who couldn’t sit through Shaun of the Dead.

Of course, those are only the details pertinent to pure horror. For those who like a little spice for thought to their films, Child offers that as well if you know where to look for it. In fact, the spice is what distinguishes the movie from others in the first place. As we mentioned before, the film brings up a dark ethics question concerning love and just how far it can go before it stops being so. The father, Anton, acknowledges this via a Nietzsche quote as they dig up the bodies of their victims: “Nietzsche said that anything done out of love is beyond good and evil. We’re not evil then, are we, Judith?” He later mumbles something about Aristotelian ethics, which makes things equally interesting for those who know anything about them. Though the parents’ actions remain deeply questionable, they are not, like most fairy tale villains, black and white in their reasoning: in spite of yourself, you can see things from the desperate mother’s point of view, and the guilt and childish awkwardness of the father evokes some sympathy. The film’s conclusion begs the question of whether the ending can truly be considered “happy” or not, as the hero counters a morally ambiguous action with another.

Among other topics, the acting was good. Pulsipher made a wonderful Tara, doing a far better job than many actresses working in the low-budget horror genre. Some critics have mentioned that she is “too pretty” to be a high school outcast, but in the world of teens, behavior and reputation tend to override appearances. She comes off as sincerely sympathetic to Johnny, which in turn makes her sympathetic to the audience as well. Jesse Haddock pulled off the mute Johnny in fine style, but his dialogue felt stunted in his first scene involving normal speech—he didn’t capture the present attitude quite enough, not to give anything away. He did well in the final scene, however. I think the only actor who bothered me in any noteworthy way was Lori Petty. Though most reviewers we have read seem to know her, we haven’t heard of her before this film. And though we wonder if this isn’t the fault of the actress so much as it is of the script, her dialogue as Judith felt too overdone and wooden as a result. She achieved the sense of distant and almost selfish coldness particular to her character, but lines like “Do what you must, my son” gave it a painful, jaw-clenching quality. It felt as if she never expressed any real softness for the son who she desperately tries to revive, and, though that may be the point, the origins behind her selfishness are never explored or implied as Anton’s are.

Yes, we all know Malone isn’t the greatest director. Okay? Okay. Something tells us that he decided that it wouldn’t hurt him to get creative for a T.V. film. As anyone will tell you, Fair-Haired Child is easily the best thing he’s ever done. Great atmosphere, nostalgic concept, and the weight of character over violence makes for a damn good addition to the Masters of Horror series. If we didn’t mention it before, do everything you can not to spoil the film for yourself—the surprises are the best part.

9/10 Fausts approve this film.

A young girl has been abducted and locked in a cellar with a strange young boy. As time passes, the girl soon learns that they are not alone in the cellar as something else is about to enter their lives. Are they both about to be victims or is there something even more sinister about to occur? Is it good or evil? You be the judge of the deal made with the fair haired child.

Masters of Horror: The Fair Haired Child is a bizarre little tale that takes a dark look at love and loss through the eyes of the occult, sad part is there a little cataract forming on the eye that really blurs the vision on this one.

Maybe it’s me, but I don’t really consider the man who helmed Feardot.com and wrote Universal Soldier: The Return to be a true master of horror, so how William Malone got sandwiched in with John Landis, John Carpenter and Dario Argento is a little beyond me.

Anywho, a teenage girl and boy are locked in a cellar, with some kind of creepy ass creature that appears and chases them around every couple of hours, meanwhile a mysterious couple walk around outside wringing their hands while dressed in all black. A few brief flash backs and you end up with your storyline, but other than the creepy critter, The Fair Haired Child has little going for it. Well it also has the lovely Lori Petty and her piercing blue eyes in it, but that’s really about it.

There is a good head smashing in this one, but not much else in the blood and gore department, so mix that in with a lack luster story and a waste of a beautiful Lori Petty and you get a fairly (HA!) dull entry into the Masters of Horror series.