I love the "Masters of Horror" series and the opportunity it creates for experimental "little movies" for we who love horror and for the directors in question. This series has spawned several complaints about the "Masters" in the title. Maybe they could have chosen a better word for the world's retentive but in a society riddled with hype, I took the "Masters" with a grain of salt. I'd like to see a series of "Unknowns". I like the way different directors bring different nuances (and wild opposites)to the idea of a horror film.<br /><br />Which brings me to "Fair Haired Child". I know IMDb has lifted this one above the 5.0 middle but, you know what ... it didn't work for me. I couldn't get in the saddle. I loathed "Fear.Com" because it wasted an opportunity, I own "House on Haunted Hill" because of ... the house, not the tale. For tale, I also own the original B&W. I don't mean to pound Malone because I genuinely believe something is stirring there and maybe his "Parasomnia" will let it loose. I felt "FHC" tried to insert "art" into the movie. Horror films can go "art" but it is a syncronicity or "aftermath". Do the horror first. Time and audience (not critics)will determine if a horror film made the "art" level. It's a wobbly distinction at best. Trying to force it into a film is nearly a warranty that it ain't gonna happen. It's an afterward, not a strategy. Unless, of course, you genuinely are a "master" of horror. There aren't many. After riding the clichéd story to the revelation of the FHC, I said aloud "Oh, &*^%" because it was just a tremendous letdown. So, so buildup and way the wrong direction for FHC. All the above with a very pedestrian wrap up ... I wanted to but just couldn't.