Stir of Echoes, a new supernatural thriller starring Kevin Bacon, has the unfortunate task of following in the ghostly footsteps of The Sixth Sense. The latter, of course, is one of the best and most successful movies of the summer. Stir of Echoes isn't likely to do anywhere near that well anyway, but it will certainly suffer from the comparison. The two film's similarities would be eerie if dopplegangers weren't so common in Hollywood. Both films focus on dead people invading the lives of the living to seek some sort of justice or retribution, feature children who can communicate with the dead and adults who try but can't, and largely avoid the typical horror techniques (killing and mayhem) for a creepier, more subtle approach. The differences, unfortunately for Bacon's latest, lie at the issue of quality (more on that at the end).

In Echoes, Bacon plays Tom Witzkie, a fairly young married man with a small boy (Jake, played by Zachary David Cope) and, as he learns at the very beginning of the movie, another child on the way. He's one of those characters we don't see enough of in movies--a regular guy who works hard, loves his wife (played by Kathryn Erbe), and hangs out with friends in the neighborhood (Chicago's Bridgeport, as it turns out, though little is done with that). But Tom is feeling a little frustrated: "I didn't expect to be so ordinary," he says. He's not going to be ordinary for long.

At a get-together, his sister-in-law (played by Illeana Douglas), who's studying to be a hypnotherapist, convinces Tom to let her hypnotize him. Skeptical at first, he turns out to be "one of the 8%" of people who are highly susceptible to deep states of hypnosis. Unfortunately, this experience opens him up to strange dreams and even stranger notions. At first, he catches only glimpses of the supernatural, but when his son starts talking to a person no one else can see Tom's visions become more frequent. The turning point for the family occurs when a new baby-sitter kidnaps their son. It turns out that the person Jake has been talking to, Samantha, has the same name as the baby-sitter's sister who mysteriously disappeared the year before. Could it be the same person? If you're smart enough to read this, you already know the answer.

This moment unfortunately is also the turning point for the movie. Up till then, Stir of Echoes is gripping and interesting. The visual effects used to portray the hypnosis are wonderfully bizarre--Bacon in a levitating chair as it floats toward a blank movie screen, a bloody tooth that Bacon pulls out of his mouth, an out-of-focus winter scene. All of these are subjective shots (the audience sees what Bacon sees), which makes them compelling and scary. Furthermore, the relationship between Tom and Maggie is dead-on. She's supportive but unsure, he's loving but growing more distant. After the kidnapping, the movie stirs to a boil and then runs over the edge. Tom becomes obsessed with finding the girl's dead body, going so far as to destroy both his house and marriage. But because the obsession seems so different from his "ordinary" character, it's impossible for the audience to identify with him. Once we lose that bond, we also lose our ability to care or scare. Instead, we just grow perplexed and frustrated at Tom's overwhelming obsession. And when the movie resorts to a shoot-em-up to resolve the conflict (and there's the wife just in time), you know the movie has lost its way. These shortcomings make The Sixth Sense seem even more impressive. Stir of Echoes has to distort its characters to create dramatic tension, while Sixth Sense just develops the relationships. Echoes introduces characters as plot devices (a cop who explains how the paranormal works, a neighbor who'll turn up later); Sixth Sense integrates its characters into the story. Echoes telegraphs later developments (close-up of a knife, a neighbor insisting too hard "this is a decent neighborhood"); Sixth Sense obscures for surprise. And finally Echoes resorts to old movie clichés to wrap it all up, whereas Sixth Sense reaches its apex with a stunning conclusion.

Not that Stir of Echoes is terrible. Fred Murphy's cinematography, with its dark greens and faded lighting, sets the mood. Director David Koepp adds some nice visual effects. And Erbe is particularly good as the wife who watches her husband slip away. Unfortunately, Kevin Bacon, who's usually a rock in whatever he plays, fails to convince the audience that his character is someone we should care about. That and the increasingly hokey script doom this to less-than-stirring comparisons.

 J. Robert Parks    9/20/99

Like EDTV unfortunately following The Truman Show, it's a doggone shame that Stir of Echoes had to shadow The Sixth Sense. They are their own movies to be sure, but they have enough in common that comparisons by critics and moviegoers alike will abound (see review above for details). Of the two, Stir of Echoes is the more obvious story and, therefore, less compelling. Both movies feature similarly clever plots, confident film work, and some unexpectedly fine acting for the thriller genre--and Kevin Bacon as the main character is dutifully dependable in his portrayal of a man on a downward spiral. Playing a basic blue-collar bloke down on his luck and experiencing some startling supernatural phenomena, there was plenty of room for Bacon to veer off into overacting, yet he manages to avoid this trap for the most part. The result is one of his most applaudable performances to date in a movie that ends up barely being an above-average thriller due to lack of consistency. Better than most, but not quite a classic.

Although it never reaches Sixth Sense's levels of eerie ambiance and captivation, Echoes may give you a few more jarring jolts than its predecessor--at least in the first hour or so. Unfortunately, Echoes doesn't sustain its creative creepiness all the way. Some gratuitous sex, including a violent rape scene, and the expected dose of four-letter words will present a caution for some viewers. Even more disappointing, however, is the silly new-age premise that ordinary people can be conduits for communicating with the dead. Regardless, after seeing this film you may think twice before cruising graveyards at night.

Steven S. Baldwin   10/9/99