*SPOILER ALERT*
The ending.
"The Eternal" ended with all the subtlety and grace of a freshly detonated neutron bomb. It was abrupt, unexpected, felt rushed, and its message conflicted with the point I thought was being made throughout the film.
Again, a good ending can make or break your film. In this case I think it broke it. Throughout the film there was a feeling that the powers of good were at work and would defeat the evil spirits that lived in the house. A good and noble theme to weave into your work. However, when Antoinette tries to use her Bible, it is knocked out of her hands and the demon says something to the effect of, "That won't help you now." Then the demon proceeds to throw her down on the bed and rape her--which was the actress thrashing around on the bed in what resembled a seizure rather than a rape and was cut with what was supposed to be the demon on top of her from another angle, but they were covered in a black sheet so it was hard to really know. The End. So evil triumphs in the end even though we eluded to good/faith being the thing that would overcome evil?
If evil is going to win there needs to be more foreshadowing of it. Or establish something like, "simply being good isn't enough," or "in your own power you cannot defeat evil, it takes something or someone greater than yourself." Something like that would help exponentially and would leave the viewer with less of an "I've been cheated out of a good ending" feeling.
The house used in the “promo trailer” for this film is indeed scary and would have been great if they had actually been able to use it. Instead, the house used, at least for exterior shots, was an average looking house, although the opening shot did lend itself to a feeling of the unknown and growing unrest. However, in an exterior shot where Antoinette meets the realtor at said house, they are clearly in the parking lot of some sort of apartment complex.
The interior shots were also shot either in an apartment and/or various places in a hotel. Unfortunately, it's obvious on every level that they are not in "the house." The primary problem with the locations/sets is that the script establishes that the house is very old...think the days of slavery and brothels. So, while the house in the opening shot works on one level, like I said earlier, it isn't nearly old enough to fit the bill. The interior locations do not fit the bill either. This takes the viewer out of the film and prevents them from fully engaging their suspension of disbelief.
Costumes, as far as the main characters go, were fine. There was nothing particularly special about them, since the story is set in present time. This is a great choice for low budget filmmakers since it means that the actors can use their own wardrobes to create the desired look and feel of their character. Bottom line: this save money.
The costume of the slave owner ghost and the ghosts of the brothel whores, though, were too 21st century and didn't even come close to being period. I understand that it is tough to do period costumes on a small budget, but that is something that should be thought about in the writing process.
Demons. No money for period costumes means that you certainly don't have the money for amazing make up and costumes to create real frightening creatures from the spirit realm. Again, something to consider in your writing.
As the costumes go, I had a much easier time with the non-period costumes, but I was not as understanding on the choices made for the demons. In "The Eternal," Watkins tries to get around the lack of demon costumes/make up with the insertion of still artwork pulled from a source that I'd assume was the internet. Two giant problems with that:
1) It doesn't work at all. Instead of being frightened by the appearance of a ghastly demon, I was both shocked and amused by a piece of still artwork being thrown into a film in place of a character.
2) COPYRIGHT ISSUES! I feel pretty safe in assuming that the owner of the copyright on the images has more money to pay an attorney to sue you, the filmmaker, than you do to say "I'm sorry, here's the royalties on that." Unless it is art that you have made yourself or a friend has made (and signed a release for it) you would be smart to avoid it all together...too many legal ramifications which, yes, you are subject to.
