Change Your Image
Reviews_of_the_Dead
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Lowlifes (2024)
Great Movie that Plays with Expectations
This is a movie that I heard good things about. The biggest thing that I took away was to come into this blind. Do not look up the trailer or anything outside of the synopsis below. I rather enjoyed this 2024 horror film that is found on Tubi, just to help convince you to see this.
Synopsis: the survival instincts of a road-tripping family are put to the test when they have no other choice but to stay the night at a remote homestead.
I'm going to give a brief recap of the characters without spoiling anything. We are following a family that is taking their RV to the country. The father is Keith (Matthew MacCaull). He is married to Kathleen (Elyse Levesque). They have two children. The elder is their daughter, Amy (Amanda Fix), who we will learn is gay. She has a brother, Jeffrey (Josh Zaharia), who likes to do Madlibs and has impulse control issues.
This family has a run in with Vern (Richard Harmon) and Billy (Ben Sullivan). They're looking for their missing cousin, Melior (Todd Masters). This is a tense scene as the cousins are seeing if this family has seen Melior. They said they didn't and are ready to head on their way. There is another run in with the cousins after their truck breaks down. Billy hitches a ride to get help.
There is also the family that is at the homestead from the synopsis. The grandfather is Neville (Kevin McNulty). He lives there with Billy and two granddaughters. There is resourceful and talented Savannah (Brenna Llewellyn) and there is also Juli Ann (Cassandra Sawtell). When these two families meet, it will be a night that neither group will ever forget.
Now that I have that set up, I think I'll do a spoiler section at the end. Until then, this is a movie that has twists and turns that I rather enjoyed. It is aided that the characters play with conventions that we've seen before. That is something that impressed me. It is a movie for people who have seen the troupes already and then takes you on a ride.
Where I want to go is to discuss conventions. First, this would be a hixploitation film. We get that through the characters of Vern and Billy from the first interaction. What I like there is that the family are the outsiders. We've seen this quite a bit in movies in this subgenre where they're from the city and go into an area where they don't necessarily belong. I'd also say that we're getting a variation on a slasher and home invasion with the way that things play out. What I like here is that the characters can hold their own, which is something we don't always see in these subgenres.
That should be enough for the story. It is quite simple and it carried more by the acting performances, so that is where I'll go. Again, this helps make this work due to managing expectations. Fix is good as Amy. What I like is that she seems to be getting too old to go on these trips. It turns out to be more than that. I like what she does to bring this character to life. MacCaull is also quite good and Levesque works as his wife. What is interesting here is that the former turns out to be a horrible human being with things that he says as this goes on. The latter is timid, so it works. Zaharia is good for what he brings to his role. The other best performance with Fix and MacCaull though is Llewellyn. I like that when we first meet her and her family, she seems simple. She has the drive and talent to make something out of herself, but she must leave this area. That adds tension to reveals later. Other than that, Sawtell, Harmon, McNulty, Sullivan, Alexander Calvert, Dayleigh Nelson and Masters helped round this out for what was needed.
All that is left then is filmmaking. I thought that the cinematography was good to capture where this is set. Being out in the middle of nowhere adds tension since our characters cannot get away easily. The framing is good there as well. This also goes bloody and gory, which was good. They toe that line of not going over the top, which I appreciated. There is something here that also made me cringe with the implications so that works in its favor. Other than that, the soundtrack and design work well for what was needed.
In conclusion, this one I heard good things about it and rather enjoyed what we got. How it plays with expectations was something that I enjoyed. It also uses subgenres that are familiar to do different things with them. Acting helps here. The best performances are by Fix, MacCaull and Llewellyn. The rest are good in support. I thought that this was made well. I like how it captures where this is set and gives us a good amount of gore without going over the top. I rather enjoyed this film and would recommend once again to come to see this one blind.
My Rating: 8 out of 10
Spoilers
Now the reveal here is that our family on vacation are cannibals. They take these trips every year as a group. It almost feels like they are going 'hunting'. What is good though, when we first meet them, it is that tense scene with Vern and Billy. This is playing with expectations, because we've seen in things like Deliverance or The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. Normally we meet these backwoods people briefly before they attack the group from the city. Our aggressors are this non-descript white family who are the visitors.
It was then from there that we met Savannah, Juli Ann and Neville. Savannah wants to go to community college but is afraid to fail. Her family also relies on her around the house, so she doesn't want to leave them behind. This family is quite nice and we see that hospitality toward the visitors when they show up. I do like humanizing both families. The countryfolk don't have much, but they're willing to share.
Something else that is interesting is the fact that our country family isn't the prejudice ones. Savannah is also a lesbian. Juli Ann picks at her, but deep down accepts and loves her. Keith looks down at the country folk. He mocks their house. He doesn't think they deserve to live. We also see there's an issue here that he discovers his daughter is gay. He is irate about it. I thought that was an interesting idea to play. You'd expect this guy to be the one who is tolerant and he's the opposite. We also get the idea that he is abusive toward Kathleen. I'm not sure if he physically hits her or just verbally. There's also Jeffrey who has impulse controls as he kills Billy. This upsets his parents. Amy is skilled at killing but wants to give it up. I like how it seems like she's just outgrown the family vacations.
I love that all this is in the movie, but we get it as we go on. It sets the stage, makes us think one thing before giving us reveals as we go. That was good filmmaking and the acting performances drive it home.
Donnie Brasco (1997)
Different Take on the Mob Movie, Blending Police Procedural
This was a movie that I'm not entirely sure how I got turned on to. My guess is that my buddy Craig, who I watched The Godfather and Scarface with, probably told me that this was the next one we should check out. Al Pacino is my favorite actor of all time. This is an older role for him. What also adds to this is the fact that we're combining the mob movie with undercover federal agents. My recent rewatch was due to my wife, Jaime, and I doing our podcast - Depp Dive: A Depper Look at Johnny's Feature Filmography.
What I was alluding to is that we have Joseph Pistone posing as Donnie Brasco. He's undercover and has been working on this for two years. The job was only supposed to last three months, so this is straining his relationship with his wife, Maggie (Anne Heche). They also have three daughters, complicating it further. He can get in with Lefty (Pacino), over a diamond ring that Donnie claims to be fake. This leads him to meet the likes of Sonny Black (Michael Madsen), Sonny Red (Robert Miano) and others. It gets more dangerous, the deeper he gets and blurs the lines of who is real, Joseph or Donnie.
Now as I've been saying, this is an interesting blend of mob movie with police procedural. Also being based on true events makes this even crazier to me. I'm sure there are things that have changed and altered to make this more interesting to watch, but just knowing that someone got in as deep as they did while undercover is great. I also think that this gives an interesting look at being in the mafia, how they operated and how dangerous it could be, especially if someone above you suspects something. They don't necessarily have to be correct in what they think. Donnie brings up how this is run like the military. He's not completely wrong, but blindly following orders is a definite similarity.
I'd also say that the acting here is great. What I've come to realize going through Depp's films, he tends to be in movies with a strong cast around him. This is him taking a backseat though to Pacino, even though Depp is playing the titular character. There is the aspect that Lefty keeps getting passed over. Donnie would be another one to do that as Sonny Black gives insight as to why that is happening. Lefty is fiercely loyal, but he's also getting older and just lacks something to make him rise higher. He's an asset still though. I don't want to overshadow that. Pacino and Depp are great as the two leads. Madsen, Bruno Kirby, James Russo, Miano and the rest of the mob guys are on point. They feel real. Madsen has something about him that he could snap at any time which makes his character terrifying. I'd say that Zeljko Ivanek, Gerry Becker, Rocco Sisto and the other federal agents are good as well.
Someone that I've purposely left out until now is Heche. Her along with the three daughters are interesting here. Joseph is neglecting them. It is wearing Maggie thin. This humanizes his character. It takes her asking him why he hates her that he finally shows vulnerability. I think that is needed, because he is so hardened throughout. He can't falter or his life is on the line. His family too. I just think this adds a needed dimension.
All that is left to say is that this is a good movie. I like building tension here seeing how Donnie isn't truly all in with the guys he spends most of his time with. Him getting caught is part of that. Being as deep as he is, it seems like Joseph is fading and there would only then be Donnie. The cinematography is good to capture that vibe as well as the era that it is set. We have limited effects, but it also isn't that type of movie. The soundtrack also fit what was needed there. If you like crime movies, I'd recommend this one. It is different from others in this subgenre as I've said, blending mob with procedural. Being based on a true story also adds another element as well.
My Rating: 8.5 out of 10.
New Life (2023)
Different Take on a Difficult Topic and Overused Subgenre
This was a movie that I got the chance to see thanks to Keir Waller from Strike Media. The screener was sent over to me with the press release. Looking into it, I figured out that this was a horror film so that made me intrigued to see this. Seeing that it featured Sonya Walger, from the television shows Lost and FlashForward as another perk. I also realized that Tony Amendola was in this as well. To clarify, this is getting its wide release for 2024 and making its debut at festivals the year prior.
Synopsis: a mysterious woman on the run and the resourceful fixer assigned to bring her in. Their two unique stories inextricably link, as the stakes of the pursuit rise to apocalyptic proportions.
We start this with Jessica Murdock (Hayley Erin) walking outside. There's blood on her face. She goes into her place, gets cleaned up quickly and changes. It is then we see two guys come in with guns. She found a ring in her partner's drawer, hidden. She takes it with her and sneaks into the back of a pickup truck to hitch a ride to get away.
The other story follows Elsa Gray (Walger), who is the fixer. The leader of the team is Raymond Reed (Amendola). They believe that Jessica has a new form of Ebola and they're trying to prevent an outbreak. In the makeshift command center is a team of programmers. One of which who works with Elsa is Vince Harding (Jeb Berrier). These two banter back and forth. Something that we learn is that Elsa has ALS and is struggling with coming to terms.
Getting back over to Jessica, we get to see her in the past and the events that led her to being on the run. Her and her boyfriend, Ian (Nick George), went camping. During this, they meet a dog. It bit her and Ian developed a rash. In her present, she meets good people along the journey. There is an elderly farming couple of Frank (Blaine Palmer) and Janie (Betty Moyer). The former catches her stealing canned soup and invites her in. They want her to stay with them, but she can't. The other is a bartender, Molly (Ayanna Berkshire), who is hiding from an abusive ex-boyfriend. Jessica knows she is fleeing from the authorities, but she doesn't know the reason or what she is carrying. Elsa doesn't fully know either and the results could be disastrous.
That is where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the story. Something that I want to include here is that while doing a bit of research, the reveal of this disease was spoiled for me. It didn't hurt my viewing of what we got, but I think would have been more shocking when we saw it. What I'll say is that outside of what I've given you, if you can avoid spoilers, I think it carries more weight.
Now that I've gotten that out of the way, let me delve into things deeper. The first is that this feels like the concept developed out of the COVID pandemic. We have this secret group that is trying to stop the spread of what Jessica has. They're not revealing things to the public or even Elsa. She was selected for a couple of reasons. She is great at what she does, but she also has ALS, so if she ends up getting infected, she already has limited time in their eyes. I thought this reveal was a gut punch, as does our character for good reason. I like seeing the depths of how shady the organization is. They're putting her at risk for humanity.
There's also the issue here that Jessica is fleeing. Part of it is that they don't tell her why she's being held. Ian gets sick. The ambulance doesn't take them to a normal hospital. She thinks she's been pursued due to killing someone. Because of that, she is spreading what she has. There is a selfish way of looking at this where everyone has the right to live and be free. The issue here though is that if you're spreading something that could wipe out humanity, where should you stop? In her defense, she doesn't know. It isn't until interactions late that she notices a pattern going back to Ian. Erin is good with her performance so is that as well.
The last thing then is I want to discuss Elsa and Jessica, since the concept is them being similar in what they're dealing with. Elsa has ALS, which isn't a death sentence. It is just that way for her way of life. There's a powerful scene where she is confronted with if she's considering suicide. She was also selected for this job because Raymond knew her diagnosis. Elsa is experiencing the early stages and struggles. Credit to Walger for her performance. Then on the other side, Jessica doesn't know she is a carrier. She is just trying to survive. Her mortality to brought before her as time goes on and it is a difficult decision. An interesting thing here, because Ian is dead and she's on the run, she is starting a new life. There's another way to look at the title as well.
Let's then finish out the rest of the cast. Amendola is cast perfectly here as Raymond. He has a great balance of caring, but also being ruthless. He also gives information on a need-to-know basis which fits the character and their position. I like Berrier who helps to humanize Elsa more. She feels like a villain, but their interactions along with her reveals change that feeling. Berkshire, Moyer and Palmer are all good to help Jessica see there are decent people. George and the rest of the cast rounded this out for what was needed as well.
All that is left then is filmmaking. I thought that how this was edited was interesting. We jump in to see that Jessica is on the run. We don't know if she is a criminal or not. It is then through things that we see that it develops the characters which was good. I thought that the cinematography and how they frame things was solid as well. Something I wasn't expecting were the effects. The look of those that were infected was interesting. It was creepy and I like the take on this type of 'creature'. They do well there. I'd also say the blood we get and the aftermath of the changes was good. Other than that, the soundtrack fit what was needed.
In conclusion, this is a solid film. I'm not going to hold it against what was revealed before I could see it. There is still a good heart here for the story they're telling. It does well in setting up our two leads and then changing our perception as they are good. I'll credit the performances by Walger and Murdock as well. The rest of the cast is good at pushing them to where they end up. This was well made with the cinematography, framing and the effects leading the way there. I'd recommend this movie. It is presenting a subgenre we see quite a bit of in a different way, which is something I appreciate.
My Rating: 8 out of 10.
American Grindhouse (2010)
Just Scratches the Surface
This is a documentary that caught my attention when going through another one called Nightmares in Red, White and Blue. There is cross-over with movies that are discussed as well as people that are interviewed. Exploitation cinema fascinates me, so I decided to watch this while working. I treated it like a video podcast, where I could listen to it and watch when needed.
What this does here is start at the beginning of the film industry in the United States. Something that I knew and still makes me laugh is that at the start, exploitation started soon after. I'm glad that Eric Schaefer, Eddie Muller and Kim Morgan are interviewed. Their film historians who have great insight. Paired with them are legends of cinema like John Landis, Joe Dante, Herschell Gordon Lewis, William Lustig, David Hess and Jack Hill. Oddly enough, this documentary originally was going to be about him, but decided to pivot to do the history of exploitation cinema.
Now, I did see a couple reviews that had critiques of this ahead of watching it. One thought that they moved a bit too quickly through certain subgenres and another thought that it focused more on a highlight real of porn throughout the eras. I can see both arguments. I tend to agree more with the former that this would play better as a series. That's where I agree then with the latter in that there is lot that gets left out that we just scratch the surface.
What I will say is that this is well-made. I like the fact that we see the people interviewed, but this does a great job of incorporating in the films they're talking about as well as showing others from the same era that also fit. That is a good touch. This documentary could be used a bit more, but it still gave me an excellent list of movies to add to my ever growing one to check out at some point. This is more of a surface level one for newer to novice exploitation viewers.
My Rating: 7.5 out of 10.
Nightmares in Red, White and Blue: The Evolution of the American Horror Film (2009)
Great to See these Legends Give Their Thoughts on the History of the Genre
This was a documentary that I've known about for a few years. I'm not sure when it popped on my radar, but the title was part of it. Seeing the legends that were interviewed for it was something else. I decided to put this on at work and treat it like a podcast. There were things that I knew already, but hearing more insight from the filmmakers involved, that intrigued me.
From what I've gathered, this is based off a book by Joseph Maddrey. It is one I've added to my list to check out. This is recapping United States horror cinema, starting with the Universal era. I was late seeing those movies, but now that I have, it makes sense that they're based off classic literature and mimicking the gothic style. It wasn't until the late 40s and into the early 50s that we'd get a shift due to the atomic age and threat of nuclear war. I know that German expressionism influenced those early horror films, but it is from there that US filmmakers would influence others.
Bringing back up something I've already said, we have Lance Henriksen narrating. Legends that are interviewed are Larry Cohen, Joe Dante, John Carpenter, Mick Garris, Tom McLoughlin, George A. Romero, Brian Yuzna and Roger Corman. What made me happy is that as these individuals pass away, having this record preserved is good. It is both sad and great to see. John Kenneth Muir is also in this, he's a respected voice in the genre. This also interviews Darren Lynn Bousman, Dennis Fischer and Anthony Timpone, who are more contemporary, but still important.
Hearing how this presents the information of how each decade is influenced by the state of world is interesting. I thought this was well-made with how it was constructed. The number of movies referenced and clips that are edited in to help show what is being said is great. There is one blip where they bring up David Cronenberg, who is Canadian. I get the sediment, but this isn't a North American documentary. Cronenberg is a legend, so I get it as well. I'd recommend it to horror fans as I enjoyed my time.
My Rating: 8 out of 10.
The Girl in the Trunk (2024)
Interesting Premise, Limited by Budget
This is a movie that I got the chance to see via screener thanks to Keir Waller from Strike Media. Now I was leery about checking this out. It is listed on the Internet Movie Database as a thriller. The press release also confirms it as a claustrophobic thriller. It was on Letterboxd that I saw this as considered horror so I agreed to watch for review. It is a concept I've seen before so I was wondering what this would do to set itself apart.
Synopsis: a woman finds herself kidnapped and trapped in the space of a speeding car's trunk.
We begin at a car rental place. There's an interesting camera angle from below the car where we see someone in high heels get out, try the door and find it locked. It is while she is doing this, someone else in heavy shoes sneaks into the car. The person who drove up is Manda (Katharina Sporrer). She gets knocked out by the second person.
She then wakes up as the synopsis says, in the trunk. Her phone is with her so she tries to call for help. Something interesting is that her kidnapper has changed the code. She is also in a wedding dress. While she is trying to figure out what to do, there is a phone call that comes in. The picture is for a man named John (Adam Kitchen). We will learn that they were getting married and she fled.
Manda calls 911. The voice she talks to belongs to Caspar Phillipson. The questions to help her are odd. Manda gets annoyed, but she also wants to get rescued. She soon realizes though; the voice isn't an operator. It is her kidnapper. This person wants to play a game. He offers her the code to the phone if she'll play along. It becomes a race against the clock out and her decisions have reactions.
That is where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the characters. There is more I'll get into, but we have a simple story here. It is an idea that I've seen in movies like The Caller or Trunk: Locked In. What is interesting is that this latter movie came out last year and I saw it at Nightmares Film Festival. Being locked in the trunk of a moving car is terrifying and grounded enough in reality where it is believable. There are also movies like The Vanishing where it is done as well.
Now what this one does a bit differently is that we have Manda who fled her wedding. We learn more as we go on, but it comes down to her father is demanding. They were rich growing up. He is the head of a bank. Manda works there. It almost seems like he is friends with the family of the man she is marrying. She doesn't officially say this, but her fleeing the wedding is her taking control in her life. Now I didn't grow up rich. This is a concept that I can still understand and it feels real. Not the most original, but still works in the framework here. I'll say that I thought Sporrer was solid in her performance. I did like the growth that we saw by the end.
Let's then go over and talk about our villains. The main one is our kidnapper, of course. I thought that he had a good, calm voice which is eerie when we see him shoot people or attacks others. He is also messing with her head by giving information. It isn't until they play a game that he confirms that he will tell the truth from that point on. I'll credit Phillipson here as he isn't menacing to look at, but that is more terrifying. I think I should also include Manda's father, Stephen Jennings. He's played physically by Hother Bøndorff and voiced by Christopher de Courcy-Ireland. My guess is due to this taking place in Texas. I did have an issue is that the voice syncing wasn't great. I do like how firm he is in his stance as someone who isn't told no so what his daughter does upsets him more. There are decisions that don't fit for me, but that's more with the writing.
There is one last bit for the story. I do think that this does well with playing with our expectations. We see Manda early on break open the trunk by removing the lock. This annoys our kidnapper. It also causes him to stop and someone to see if they need help. He does things to punish Manda and it involves forcing a tube through the backseat into the trunk. This uses CGI to bring what he does to life. It doesn't look great, but it is also the only way to do it safely. I do like seeing cracks with this villain for sure as she pushes his buttons.
Let me then go over to filmmaking. I'll say that the cinematography was solid. There are slight issues I have with it. First being how big this trunk seems Manda can almost sit up in it at times. Now our actor isn't the biggest size-wise, but I know when I've been inside a trunk, there isn't much room. It has been a while though. I do like getting that perspective. It does good things by going out of the broken lock or through the tube into the backseat. The things that Manda does to learn more information is good. There was more not great CGI as well. When working with a smaller budget, I get it. Other than that, I thought the sound design was solid, especially with hearing through parts of the car. That adds to the atmosphere.
All that is left is the acting. I've already said that Sporrer and Phillipson are good. They carry the movie for sure. Bøndorff brings good size and look to his role. He seems like a Texan. Jennings's voice doesn't necessarily fit him. It was jarring. Other than that, Lianna Taylor and Kitchen were solid. There's another situation where Lars Hammer Andersen is playing a hunter and Danny Thykær does the voice. They don't fully fit when watching this. It doesn't ruin the movie either, but I noticed this for sure.
In conclusion, I thought that this uses a solid premise. Being trapped in a trunk without knowing why is terrifying. There's the added element that no one knows where Manda went so it takes time to find her is another. The two leads are solid, so credit to Sporrer and Phillipson. The rest of the cast are fine. Just slight issues with voices not necessarily fitting. This is made well enough. I enjoy cinematography and framing. The issues for me are with CGI. It doesn't ruin this though as there isn't necessarily another way of doing it. Overall, I'd say that this is solid. It doesn't stand out against other movies with a similar premise but is worth a watch.
My Rating: 6 out of 10.
I Saw the TV Glow (2024)
Surreal and Arthouse Film that has Things to Say
This is a movie that I heard buzz about from festivals. I know a couple podcasts brought it up and this one went on my list of movies to see to form my 'Best Of' end of year list. What also intrigued me is that the ratings for this have it on the lower end of Letterboxd's Top 250 horror movies as well. I tried to temper expectations, but I caught this opening night at the Gateway Film Center.
Synopsis: two teenagers' bond over their love of a supernatural TV show, but it is mysteriously cancelled.
I'll first look at the younger of the two teens from the synopsis. This starts back in 1996. That would be Owen (Ian Foreman). We first get to meet him on election night where the polling station is at their local junior high school. His mother, Brenda (Danielle Deadwyler), takes him into the booth with her. She hangs out afterwards to talk to other adults while Owen approaches Maddy (Brigette Lundy-Paine). Owen asks if her parents are voting. They aren't but she tells him that she is allowed to use the black room after school hours. She's reading an episode guide about her favorite show, The Pink Opaque. Owen has heard about it, but his bedtime is before it starts. What Maddy tells him drives his want to watch it.
As kids will do, Maddy gives him an idea to say he's going to stay at a friend's house. He hasn't talked to this other child in years. Owen then sneaks off to Maddy's house, where she has a friend over to watch this show, Amanda (Emma Portner). This changes his life. He doesn't sneak off again, but Maddy leaves recorded VHS tapes of the show for him to take home.
Things progress through the years as Owen grows to be played by Justice Smith. He is now in high school and Maddy is closer to graduation. Owen still has an early bedtime, but he sneaks off again to watch the show with Maddy since Amanda has abandoned her. This night, we see how depressed this young woman is. She tells Owen that she is going to run away and that he should join her. The stress of this causes him to come clean through his friend's mother. It is then years before he sees Maddy again and when he does, his memories of their favorite show and what happened to her messes with the fabric of their existence.
Now this is a hard movie to condense into a synopsis without going into spoilers. Ahead of seeing this, a voice in the horror community that I respect warned people that the trailer shows a different movie than what we got. I'll be honest, it was close to the start of the third act that I wondered if this was going to be a horror movie. By the end though, I do think it goes there. This is a great companion piece with writer/director Schoenbrun's first film, We're All Going to the World's Fair. They tackle similar ideas and concepts in a surreal way.
Where I want to go from there is delving more into what we're getting here. To correlate it with the first film by this Schoenbrun a bit more, they are focusing on two characters who aren't popular. I almost got the idea that Owen might be autistic. There is something about how he reacts to things and how his parents treat him that make me think how he processes information is different from others. Then Maddy is a lesbian. Being in the mid-1990s to start this, it wasn't as acceptable, especially at the age that she is in society. It doesn't help that her best friend Amanda tried out to for the cheerleading team and then accused Maddy of trying to touch her breast. Maddy is hurt by what happened and that rejection adds to it. Her home life isn't great. That is something to do with Owen as well. Brenda loves him, but she has cancer. His father and him do not seem to connect in the limited basis we see. He is Frank and played by Fred Durst. The only thing we hear him ask is if the Pink Opaque is a show for girls. There's also a creepy scene where he stares at Owen with the glow of TV making things eerie.
I then want to go over to something that I could connect with growing up. I'll say that in junior high, I wasn't popular. Now at my high school, it was easy to acclimate back into the popular groups because I played sports. I still had my hobbies that I kept hidden from my friends due to being afraid of getting mocked. Maddy and Owen are in love with this show. There's nothing wrong there. The problem though becomes Maddy cannot separate herself from what she sees, sinking into madness. She wants Owen to be a part of that. He cannot commit to that and it sends him into a panic. What I think we're getting here is showing mental health and how fragile it can be, especially for people that don't fit in. This was uncomfortable to watch, but it also kept me glued.
Now there's another aspect here that I wanted to delve into, which is the idea of interests we have and how they don't always hold up. Owen decides to grow up during the third act. We see how he feels like he's dying inside. There is something he said during his teen years about how he feels different inside as well. This made me wonder if he was asexual with the conversation with Maddy. There is a scene later that made me think of Owen's inner child. We also see Owen's reaction to watching the Pink Opaque as an adult. I'm not going into more detail than that, but I love the point that is being made here.
What makes this work though is the acting. Foreman is good as the younger Owen and I love the take that Smith gives us. This older version carries the burden but plays well off the stage set. We see him from these more formidable years and with makeup, we see the adult version as well. Seeing the stress that is caused to Owen by those around him is something that I understand. Also, being an adult is hard and this shows that. Lundy-Paine also has a great performance. She hates her home life and wants to get out. There is mental illness here with her delusions and what she wants Owen to do. What is great here is that this movie is surreal so it blurs the lines of reality. With how convinced Maddy is, it made me wonder if there was something supernatural happening here. That is a credit to the filmmaking. Other than that, I thought the rest of the cast rounded this out for what was needed in helping push our leads to where they end up.
Since I've already moved into filmmaking, I'll finish that out. The cinematography, framing and editing are great. The world that this takes place feels real. We are seeing it through the eyes of Owen so I love that we're warping reality slightly. This is how he sees what he's experiencing. Age and life experiences are playing in it. That makes the tone of this work so well for me. This also doesn't necessarily give a definite answer to things so those that look at the supernatural things happening as real can see it that way. There's also this idea that it is mental illness messing with what the characters are experiencing so it could just delusions. I fall into the latter camp, but I like how an argument can be made either way. This is a trippy movie. There is CGI there, but since it might not be real, it works. The soundtrack also helps to build that atmosphere that it needs.
In conclusion, this is a movie that I needed to sleep on before getting my thoughts down. I knew that leaving the theater, I liked it. I wasn't ready to make determinations immediately. What I'll say is that Schoenbrun has an interesting style in both films she's done. They're not traditional horror, but they make you think. That's something I appreciate. The acting here from Smith and Lundy-Paine carry this. The rest of the cast push them to where they end up. This is well-made. I love the uncomfortable feeling from the atmosphere so crediting the cinematography, framing, effects and soundtrack. This will be divisive like the director's earlier movie. If you enjoyed that one, I think you'll dig this. What we're getting is arthouse and surreal, so keep that in mind before seeing this.
My Rating: 8.5 out of 10.
Ed Wood (1994)
Fun Take to Bring the Story of this Odd Character to Life
This is a movie that I vaguely remember coming out. I'll be honest, I didn't have any interest in seeing it until I got older. Seeing that this was a Tim Burton and Johnny Depp team up that I hadn't seen was intriguing to me. Learning more about who Ed Wood was in real life has helped. At the time of writing this, I had only seen two of his movies. As a director, I've seen Bride of the Monster. As a writer, I've seen most of Orgy of the Dead. Jaime and I watched this for our podcast, JwaC Presents Depp Dive: A Depper Look at Johnny's Feature Filmography.
Synopsis: ambitious but troubled movie director Edward D. Wood Jr. (Depp) tries his best to fulfill his dreams despite his lack of talent.
I'm doing a full review of this due to this movie being listed in the Horror Show Guide Encyclopedia, considering this to be a 'horror film' due to the titular character mostly making movies in this genre. We start out seeing Ed as he is working for a small studio and is directing a play. What turns his life around is when George Weiss' (Mike Starr) production company is looking to make an early exploitation film about a person getting a sex operation change. Ed applies to be the director, but he has no clout and is denied.
What turns things around for him is meeting Bela Lugosi (Martin Landau). He is down on his luck and we will learn about his drug addiction as this goes on. Ed wants to help him and sees an opportunity to get the director's position for this film. His original pitch revealed that he's a transvestite. Now he's able to use Bela as a bargaining chip.
The movie he made there was Glen or Glenda and this strains the relationship with George. Ed now has momentum and we see as he goes about getting his next movie made. This is the one I've seen, Bride of the Monster, but during production it was called Bride of the Atom. Ed has a team he uses including his girlfriend Dolores Fuller (Sarah Jessica Parker), Bunny Breckinridge (Bill Murray), Paul Marco (Max Casella), Conrad Brooks (Brent Hinkley), his cinematographer Bill (Norman Alden) and makeup guy Harry (Leonard Termo). Along the way he'll meet Loretta King (Juliet Landau), who strains his relationship with Dolores. He also meets a wrestler, Tor Johnson (George 'The Animal Steele) and even Vampira (Lisa Marie). Ed Wood has the dream and the drive, but as the synopsis says, he might be lacking the eye for talent.
That is where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the characters. Where I want to start is that I feel bad piling on the real person of Ed Wood. He did something that I'll never do. I know what he made was schlocky and he didn't fully understand how to make a good movie, but credit to him for still doing what he could. Now everything that I'll say from here is going to be looking at this as a fictional piece of work.
Since this is more of a character study of Ed, Bela and their relationship, that is where I want to delve. Depp does a great job at being this quirky guy. Now I've not read the biography that this is using as source material. I've also not seen interviews or anything of this real person. What I do know was that he was an oddball. His movies reflect the budget that they're working with. Having now seen this, I'm intrigued more in seeing the movies that this is referencing being made now that I have insight behind the scenes. Depp was made for this role and from what I've read, Ed's real wife agreed when visiting the set.
Shifting then over to Bela. He's one of my most seen actors of all time. Landau transforms into him which is impressive. I knew that there was a feud between him and Boris Karloff in real life. I'm glad they played that up. I also knew that Bela was addicted to morphine and how it ruined his career, also contributing to his death. That is heartbreaking. It seems like Ed was taking advantage of this aged star, but I don't think that was the case. He truly wanted to help him and give him work. Landau pays homage to this legend well from my point of view.
Since I've been leaning into the acting here, I want to say that we have a great cast here. I'm not the biggest fan of Parker, but I like the role she plays here. There's friction as things go between her and Ed. It is also an intriguing dichotomy between her and the Patricia Arquette character that he meets later when Ed takes Bela to rehab. It is a bummer the decisions that Jones made, because he's solid in this movie and never seemed to have a bad performance. G. D. Spradlin is solid as Reverend Lemon who works with Ed. His character gets upsets Ed with decisions to the film he's making with their money. There's good cameos by Vincent D'Onofrio, Murray, Starr, Cassella, Hinkley, Marie, Steele, Juliet Landau, Alden, Termo, Bellamy and the rest of the cast. It all works to bring these people to life.
All that I have left to go into is filmmaking. I thought it was a good stylistic choice to go black and white. That feels like it is paying homage to the era that Wood worked in. I thought this was lit well, which is a challenge when filming this way. The cinematography is great as well. How things are framed is great as well as capturing things that were in Wood's movies. This is limited in the effects, but it also didn't need them. The peek behind the curtain of what was used in Wood's films was another great aspect to show the charm they carry. Other than that, the soundtrack fit what was needed. I like that they used music from the films that they're showing so credit to that.
In conclusion, this is a fun movie that is capturing real history. There are things left out. There are also probably things that didn't happen or were moved to another place in the timeline. Just knowing that a movie also needs to be entertaining, I'm forgiving. The acting here is great. Depp shows such range. Landau is great as Bela. There's a strong cast behind them as well. I thought that this was well-made. Special credit there to the cinematography. I'm not sure how many fans are out there for Wood today. What I'll say though is that this is an underseen Burton and Depp film, so if you're fans of them, check this out.
My Rating: 8 out of 10.
Dante's Inferno (1924)
Interesting Take on the Epic Poem
This was a movie that I discovered when searching for horror films from 1924. I was able to find a copy on YouTube so I am adding this to my Centennial Club for Journey with a Cinephile: A Horror Movie Podcast. This is the second earliest adaptation of this source material from Dante Alighieri that I've now reviewed.
Synopsis: the tactics of a vicious slumlord and greedy businessman finally drive a distraught man to commit suicide. The entrepreneur is tried for murder, executed and afterward swiftly taken by demons to Hell where he will spend the rest of eternity.
Now for this movie we have Mortimer Judd (Ralph Lewis). He's the father of this family as well as the slumlord. He is convinced that if he isn't ruthless, his family would be in the poorhouse. His wife is Mrs. Judd (Winifred Landis). They employ a nurse, Marjorie Vernon (Pauline Starke). Mortimer doesn't seem to think there is anything wrong with her, but that could be due to him not wanting to pay. The doctor who cares for her is Joseph (Lorimer Johnston). They have a son, Ernest (William Scott). He butts heads with his father due to the condition of the apartments they own.
This then shows us a man who is indebted to Mortimer, Eugene Craig (Josef Swickard). He sends a letter asking for mercy, but he's denied. This makes him want to kill himself. His daughter, Mildred (Gloria Grey), is concerned he will do something bad. She then goes to Mortimer to beg. He ignores her as well.
Eugene did send a book to Mortimer, Dante's Inferno. He starts to read and a Fiend (Robert Klein) appears. The book comes to life, with Dante (Lawson Butt) given a tour of the underworld by Virgil (Howard Gaye). The events of the synopsis then go down where Mortimer is punished for what he's done to these people as one of his apartments catch fire, injuring tenants.
That is where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the characters. I want to start by prefacing that the version I watched didn't have a soundtrack synced with it. That makes these silent films much different without something accompanying the images. I was also curious as this started with how they were going to work on this classic tale since the beginning was for the time a modern setting. There was social commentary here that I found intriguing and relevant as well.
Let's start with the story that this is following and its message. Mortimer is a slumlord. I found it intriguing to explore this idea with a movie that is a hundred years old now. I'm not sure if that term was used when this was made, but Mortimer owns apartments that have too high of rent for what is provided. This keeps the tenant poor until the point where they get evicted and then he just allows someone new to live there. There is something that happens here though where a fire breaks out, injuring those that live there and making him libel for not helping. This is the climax and the repercussions follow.
There's another interesting storyline as well dealing with Ernest and Mortimer, father and son, since they don't see eye to eye. They get into fights regularly. We see one where Mortimer is upset that Ernest has a radio. Mrs. Judd can't go out so the son bought it so she could have entertainment. Ernest is interested in Marjorie, but this upsets Mortimer since she is there to tend to his wife. Mortimer believes that if he isn't ruthless, his family is going to spend his money until they're broke. He is exaggerating while I can see his side that they don't have an income so there's pressure on him as well.
The last part of the story to delve into was that I wasn't sure how we were going to connect Dante's poem with the story in the present of the movie. I found it interesting that Mortimer is reading this book that was sent to him from Eugene. It almost seems to come with a curse. There is a concept here that I don't love when it is used today, for the most part. I did find it interesting here and how they are incorporating it. This feels like it is borrowing from a Christmas Carol with it. I'm not going to spoil it beyond that.
Where I'll then go would be the acting. Our lead here is Lewis and I thought he plays the villainous role well. He comes off angry and every time we see him, he is rude. That works well for what happens to him later and where it ends. I did like Butt and Gaye as Dante and Virgil to set the stage for the different levels of hell. Scott works as Ernest. I like how him, Starke, Landis and Johnston push what Mortimer does and believes. The same could be said for Swickard and Grey as this other family that came into the story to change the Judd's lives forever. I did have an issue that Bud Jamison was playing the butler. My issue there is that he is white and made him up in blackface for this role. I get it is the time, but it still doesn't sit well. I'd also say that the rest of the cast was solid for what was needed, especially all those playing roles in hell as either demons or those being punished.
All that is left then is filmmaking. I do have to say that the copy I saw on YouTube was rough. It was too dark to make out details. It also made the early title cards hard to see. There also was no soundtrack synced with it. A cleaned-up version would be nice to give this a true rating. With what I could see though, I thought that bringing hell to life was great. I also love this fiend that is haunting Mortimer. I guessed that it wasn't real, but the implications of it work. The effects that we get in hell were all done in-camera so that it's impressive. This is made well enough from what I could tell for this era.
In conclusion, this is another early version of this source material that I've seen. What is interesting is the two different takes on it. I love setting up this story that is relative today about a slumlord who is living off his tenants without doing what he should to help them. Showing us Dante's vision of hell and then Mortimer being punished was great. I thought that the acting was good. The version I saw was rough, but this looked like it was made well enough from what I could tell. There is a story element used that I don't love now. Using it during this era though it is still new. Not having a soundtrack synced was a bummer as well. I'd still recommend this to fans of this era or looking into the history of the horror genre.
My Rating: 7 out of 10.
Night of the Comet (1984)
Fun Campy 80s Horror Film
This is one that I had heard about growing up, but for whatever reason didn't. Thanks to the Podcast Under the Stairs' Movie Club Challenge, it was selected to be covered there. To take part, I watched this. I've also now given it a rewatch for my Foray through the Fours.
Synopsis: a comet wipes out most of life on Earth, leaving two Valley Girls fighting against cannibal zombies and a sinister group of scientists.
Now coming into this film, I definitely thought there was going to be much more zombies than what we got. We get a variation on the creature, but they're technically not dead. They are people that survived the comet going over. We never see them eating anyone. They can talk and use weapons, which is different was well. I didn't mind this concept for the monsters, but I did want more of them. There are very few. We do see that this is a slow progression as well. I am getting ahead of myself though. Most of the population is turned to dust due to the comet. We never learn why it does, but that is the cause and it seems to be radiation. Those that get a little bit of exposure survive, but eventually turn. I did like the touch is that the last time this one went overhead, it wiped the dinosaurs out overnight.
The characters we follow are a couple of sisters. One works at a movie theater, Regina Belmont (Catherine Mary Stewart). Her sister who wears a cheerleading outfit the morning after the fateful night is Samantha (Kelli Maroney). They are the duo from the synopsis. They're also quite odd to be honest. Both are attractive for different versions. They know how to use guns, thanks to their father who is in the military. Before the world ended, they live with their step-mother Doris (Sharon Farrell). She is a horrible, controlling woman.
They meet up with a Hector Gomez (Robert Beltran). He takes a liking to Regina and she seems interested as well. This bothers Sam, but that seems more that they think they are the only three left alive. There is a group of scientists, who seemed prepared for this event and they are looking for a cure to it. They are led by Dr. Carter (Geoffrey Lewis) and Audrey White (Mary Woronov). She is standoffish and wants to stay inside of their bunker while the rest have other plans.
That's where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the characters. Where I'll start is that this film is quite campy though. It blends comedy, sci-fi and horror. The two girls have great one-liners in this film. It has cheesy fun and a little bit unrealistic. Now I am a big fan of films like this when it is done well, but even this one has a little bit too many things that are unbelievable. I still had fun with it, but there are issues with the writing. I'll coming back to that.
Sticking with what was good, would be the acting. Stewart was good as the smarter, stronger sister, but I also like Maroney's role. They play off each other well. Beltran was okay. He doesn't get much character development or screen time. I'm shocked to be honest because the normal troupe is to make him the hero. I thought the scientists were all played well. Lewis does great as the leader who has nefarious plans for the survivors. I also like Woronov and the role she played. It caught me off guard to be honest in a good way. The rest of the cast rounded out the film for what was needed in my opinion, with special credit to those that get to play 'zombies' or those descending into madness.
Let's then go to filmmaking. The effects are good, but also of the time. What they do with the sky during the comet's pass over are an example. It doesn't look great, but there's charm there that I dug. The zombies look good and when they are killed, I didn't have any issues there. I'll say that the cinematography and framing help. Making Los Angeles seem empty is a feat. That adds to the eeriness. An issue I had with the second watch is that this is a bit slow. There's a good set up, doesn't waste time to get into it and then it slows down when we get to the radio station. We then get solid set pieces, but it meanders between them.
I'll then finish out with sound design. This captures that 80s feel. The song at the beginning of the film was great in a way this decade could produce. I like the montage scene with Cyndi Lauper's 'Girls Just Wanna Have Fun' as well as some of the other song choices throughout the film. It isn't for everyone, but I was a fan of it. It adds charm and fits our leads.
In conclusion, this film has good aspects. I like the overall concept of this comet going over, wiping out most of humanity and driving survivors insane. It feels that it borrows from something like Day of the Triffids there. Our two leads are great with the supporting cast helping push them to where they end up. This is overall a well-made film. The cinematography, framing, set pieces and most of the effects are good. Just minor issues with the pacing and needing a bit more to fully make sense. I would still recommend it as it is a campy, cheesy fun film with good looking stars.
My Rating: 7 out of 10.
Direct to Video: Straight to Video Horror of the 90s (2019)
An Intriguing Era of Cinema for the Horror Genre
This was a documentary that I found while searching for ones like this to watch while at work. What I like about these is that I treat them like video podcasts. When I have time or something catches my interest, I can watch. Other than that, I love to hear people from the industry talk. This one also covers a topic that intrigued me since this was the coming of age for me era of going to the video store.
What we're getting here is taking a handful of movies and interviewing people from them, whether it is directors, writers or actors. I did like getting that behind the scenes look at movies that I grew up with or have seen after the fact. This includes Kenneth J. Hall, Jerry Smith, C. Courtney Joyner, Jeff Burr, Tiffany Shepis, Lloyd Kaufman, Fred Olen Ray, Brinke Stevens and Kelli Maroney. They all give interesting insight to this straight to video era of cinema.
I'd also say that this is well-made. The editing is a bit harsh. I'm guessing this could also be an issue with me, since I'm not giving it my full attention. It just felt that we were talking about one and then its hard transitions to the next movie they're going to cover. It doesn't ruin things, but I did have to do a double take. Part of the issue there is a cross-over where an actor is in multiple movies brought up and they're discussing them. I still like giving love to this era of horror films. I would like an extended cut that did more of a deep dive, but for what we got, I enjoyed my time. I'd recommend it to fans of this era of cinema or if you just want to learn more.
My Rating: 7.5 out of 10.
Nick of Time (1995)
Different Type of Role for Depp for this Solid Thriller
This was a movie that I watched as the next in line for Depp Dive: A Depper Look at Johnny's Feature Filmography. What is interesting is that this isn't a movie that I knew about. Now it would have been out during a time when I was young, being 8 years old. I did like Johnny Depp growing up. Jaime hadn't seen this one either.
The basic idea of this movie is Gene Watson (Depp) arrives in Los Angeles with his daughter, Lynn (Courtney Chase), via train. We see at the station is Mr. Smith (Christopher Walken) and Ms. Jones (Roma Maffia). They seem to be looking for someone. Gene catches their attention and they pull him, along with his Lynn, into a van. They want Gene to kill someone. If he doesn't, they'll kill his daughter. He has an hour and half to complete this. What is complicated is that the target is Governor Eleanor Grant (Marsha Mason). This plot goes deeper than Gene realizes and with time being short, he must decide what to do.
Now after watching this and prepping to record our podcast episode, Jaime told me that this was inspired by Alfred Hitchcock. Makes sense since this is a suspense thriller. Gene is pulled into a plot and I love the idea. Mr. Smith is just a cog in a wheel and I believe he's a police officer. I love raising the tension here not knowing who is involved. Members of the security team are. Gene notices people paying attention to him. This stressed me out in the best way possible and I'm glued to see what happens next.
Let me delve deeper in this as well. Something interesting here is that we have a simple reason that he must go through with this plot, his daughter. We learn that his ex-wife passed away so she's all that he has. Gene is willing to die or get arrested if that means Lynn survives. I feel that as a newer parent. Now this film ventures into a political thriller as well since Eleanor is seeking re-election. I love this throwaway line that we got where she made campaign promises to bad people and that is coming full circle. You can see this as the dangers of lobbyist as well as the corruption of the United States political system. That is a perk for me as well.
What also helps here is the cast. This is a more conventional role from Depp than I'm used to. We all know his odd, quirky characters, where this is just a normal guy. He does well with the performance though. Chase is good as the catalyst for him to get caught up. I like Walken, Maffia and the others who are villains, even if we don't know at first. The supporting cast features the likes of Maffia, Charles S. Dutton, Mason, Peter Strauss, Gloria Reuben, Bill Smitrovich, G. D. Spradlin, Yul Vazquez and Edith Diaz, to name just the ones that popped out while looking at the cast. This is strong across the board.
Now I'll say that the story might be a bit convoluted. I still just got lost in it. It is well made with the cinematography and framing. They know how to use the whole frame, which isn't easy to do, especially with this being set at a hotel. I appreciated that. Seeing how Gene does things to help save himself, Lynn and the governor was interesting. I was quite curious as to how this would play out and wasn't disappointed.
My Rating: 7 out of 10.
Leprechaun Returns (2018)
Fun Late Installment to a Middling Franchise
This was a movie that I remember coming out. I was getting back into watching new horror movies and doing end of year lists. I'll be honest, I had stopped watching this franchise after the fourth installment. There was positive feedback about this one though on social media. It went on a list to check out and since St. Patrick's Day was coming up, Jake and I decided to cover this on Side Quest Podcast.
Synopsis: the Leprechaun (Linden Porco) returns once again, when a group of girls unwillingly awaken him after they tear down a cabin so that they can build a new sorority house.
We start this off with getting images of how the Leprechaun was defeated in the original movie. This is ignoring the sequels and is directly connected to that first one. It then shifts to Lila (Taylor Spreitler) sleeping on a bus. She is haunted by images of this mythical creature. She arrives at the station. She is joining a sorority and one of the sisters was supposed to get her. There is no one there though. She does meet Ozzie (Mark Holton). She relents to allow him to drive her to the house.
What is interesting is that he knew her mother. This town now has a college. The house where Ozzie and his friends, including Tory, did battle with the Leprechaun is the same place that this sorority is converting. Ozzie is cryptic in the information that he gives to Lila. He does share things he remembered about Tory with her.
At the house, they're trying to take it off the grid. What is funny though is that they're still going to have the internet. They do want to make it self-sufficient with a garden, water supply and I think even using solar panels to generate electricity. Katie (Pepi Sonuga) is doing renovations with Rose (Sai Bennett). They both apologize for no one getting Lila. I believe this fell on Meredith (Emilie Reid). She is the botanist of the group, but everything she does turns into making alcohol. She shows up later with Andy (Ben McGregor), who has history with Katie, and his friend Matt (Oliver Llewellyn Jenkins). She comes with pizza as well.
Ozzie forgot his phone when dropping off Lila. He comes back and looks in the well. It shoots water, which gets into his mouth. The piece of gold he swallowed originally is still in his stomach. By touching it, the Leprechaun gets strength back. Enough to return to his form, killing Ozzie in the process. This monster then returns to the house, looking for the rest of his gold. It is a night of terror as these sorority sisters try to survive and defeat this mythical beast.
That is where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the characters. Where I want to start is that I'm not always the biggest fan when you do a sequel than ignores other movies in the franchise. What I'll say here though, I can work with it since I'm not entirely sure the Leprechaun we see in the sequels is the same every time. I guess that Leprechaun 5; In the Hood and the immediate sequel, Back 2 Tha Hood are. You can make the case that parts 2, 3 and 4 though are not necessarily related outside of Warwick Davis playing the monster. This movie though does have direct continuity.
I think that is where I'll start. I love that they got Holton back to play Ozzie. This is good as well that this character is setting the stage with Lila. She is leery of him but comes around when she learns that he knew her mother. I can work with the idea that Tory went crazy from her ordeal, worrying that the Leprechaun will eventually come after her. There are other elements like that group hiding the pot of gold. They made a map for it. The old truck and the well are also points that are reused. With how they bring back the monster, I can work with that as well. I like that his power is limited by not having his gold. A plot hole for me would be that the gold piece would still be inside of Ozzie without giving him more issues. I can digress there though.
Now with this movie here, having this sorority trying to take over this remote house and converting it is fine. It does seem a bit too far out of the way to work and I don't think it could be sanctioned. This land doesn't seem close enough to the university. Something that I like is a throwaway line, Rose says that they filed the paperwork recently. They could just easily get denied, which then my problem goes away. This place is isolated, trapping our characters and limiting who can get there.
Let's then talk about the monster. I don't know the full story, but it was a bummer that this series went away from Davis for this one and the last one. He was doing like the newer Star Wars and Harry Potter movies, so I don't know if he was ready to move on or not. Recasting him here is fine. I thought that Porco was good as the villain. He made me chuckle with his one-liners. That is the framework of the character. I do like that he doesn't know things since the last time he attacked it was the early 90s. That did add to comedy for me. I also like that since this creature doesn't have his gold, his powers are limited. He can still do magic, but it isn't until he gets more of it back that he can. I also thought that was good to not make him overpowered to start. Credit there. Also, keeping in line that four leafed clovers and iron hurt him was good. I like this concept that unless he is destroyed fully, he can come back. That adds tension with what needs to be done.
I think that I'll continue with the rest of the cast. Spreitler is a good step in for Tory's daughter. They look close enough. I also like that she's an outsider so she needs to prove herself to others. Sonuga and Bennett are both fine as sorority sisters. They're dumb at times, make bad decisions and have secrets. They don't feel one dimensional and that is good. Reid works as the jerk of that group. McGregor is an idiot and that was fine. I like that Katie is smarter than him, but because she's attracted to his looks, she settles. Jenkins is funny as this film buff guy. I liked seeing Holton reprise his role. Porco is good as this version's monster. I also wanted to credit Heather McDonald. She is doing the voice of Tory and it sounded like Jennifer Anniston. Wanted to give her credit along with the rest of the cast to round this out for what was needed.
All that is left then is filmmaking. First, I'll credit to recapturing this house and the surrounding woods. I'm not entirely sure if either is the same, but it feels like it. It has that isolated sense which is good. The cinematography is solid with framing. This helps with the practical effects. They hide the seams well. Those were also good with the blood and gore we got. This is a Syfy original so they were limited there, but director Steven Kostanski, he knows how to stretch that. There was CGI that came into play later. Not all of that looked good, but it didn't ruin it either. Other than that, the soundtrack fit what was needed. I do like how the Leprechaun can change his voice to mimic people, which adds terror for me since it disarms characters.
In conclusion, this is a fun movie. This is already a franchise that isn't great. I would say to not take them seriously though. I'm not the biggest fan of sequels that ignore other movies, but what I'll say is that what they do here works. I love the nods and homage paid to the original movie. I thought that the cast of characters were good. Porco is solid in stepping into the big shoes that Davis did for the franchise. This is made well enough. Credit there to the practical effects that give us fun deaths. The cinematography and framing helped there. Just have slight issues with CGI. This is a fun, shut off your brain sequel in my opinion. I enjoyed my time here and this is on the higher end of the franchise for me.
My Rating: 6.5 out of 10.
Vermines (2023)
Engaging and Terrifying Spider Film
This was a movie that had buzz coming to Shudder. It sounds like this did well at festivals and there was excitement. Due to that information, it jumped up to the top of my movies to watch for 2024 to build my end of year list. There also wasn't a 2024 horror film coming to the theater by me so I checked this out as a Featured Review.
Synopsis: residents of a rundown French apartment building battle against an army of deadly, rapidly reproducing spiders.
We start this in a desert somewhere in the middle east. There are guys searching and one of them finds a hole under a rock. There is a bit of webbing in it. They have a method to flush out spiders that are living within. This group is joined by the guy who found it and they're catching the ones that flee. We see that the guy who found it wasn't so lucky.
This then shifts over to France. Our main character is Kaleb (Théo Christine). He is at a local store where he is messing with the owner, Ali (Samir Nait). Kaleb knows that this proprietor has good merchandise hidden and that he should be able to see it since he's a good customer. This turns out to be true. He buys a set of earrings. He also sees a rare spider. Ali thinks it could be poisonous so Kaleb needs to be careful. Our character buys both items.
When he returns home, we get a better idea of where he lives. He helps Mme Zhao (Xing Xing Cheng) who seems like the superintendent or a custodian. He roughs up Moussa (Mahamadou Sangaré) who made a mess. He then goes up to his apartment that he shares with his sister, Manon (Lisa Nyarko). She is remodeling the bathroom and this upsets Kaleb. What we learn is that their mother passed away. She wants to sell and leave. Kaleb doesn't due to all the memories here as well as all the people that knew his mother around them. They are all leaving though.
In Kaleb's room, he has a mini-zoo. He has a range of insects, arachnids and reptiles. He gets upset as the lights and the heater keep getting shut off. He's worried his pets will die. We then see how he can afford all this. He steals shoes and sells them. His partner is Mathys (Jérôme Niel). This guy is stealing bicycles which upsets Kaleb since he's doing it in the area. Since it is low income, Kaleb doesn't want those around him to suffer. Mathys understands and vows to return them. He also does MMA.
Now this spider that Kaleb has. He makes a home for it in an old shoebox. This doesn't hold though and it gets out. He tries to seal his room until he can find it. There is a complication that it is much smarter and its will to survive greater. Kaleb is faced with seeing his ex-best friend as well, Jordy (Finnegan Oldfield). He along with his girlfriend, Lila (Sofia Lesaffre) come over to help with the bathroom. Mathys is there as well.
Things take a dark turn though when this spider reproduces. None of our characters realize what its potential is and how quickly it evolves. This complex is soon overrun and the police need to do what they can to hold it. That leads to a fight for survival.
That is where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the characters. Where I want to start is that if you don't like spiders, this is going to get under your skin. I've heard other reviews crediting this for taking the subject seriously as most using killer spiders tend to go whimsical. Whether that is making them large or just going lighter with the tone. This one is bleak and gave me vibes of REC with the idea that our characters get trapped inside this building and the police are quarantining them until a plan can be made. It is also interesting that this came out the same year as Sting, since this is a similar movie. They would make a good double feature.
Now that I have that out of the way, let's delve deeper into the premise. This is a simple one. We have this dangerous spider that is living in the desert. It is found, captured and brought to France. Ali doesn't know much about it and neither does Kaleb. This ignorance leads to everything. We have an old rundown building, which helps with the atmosphere. Trapping the people inside makes it contained. This legitimately goes terrifying as well with how quickly these spiders take over. It doesn't feel like a cheat though with information that is found about them. Jordy thinks he found what species they are and that they will continue to grow larger to combat their predator in the area they live. In this case, humans. They evolve fast due to how quickly they reproduce.
Those parts of the concept help to make this scary. What aids in that is the development of the characters. We learn enough to the point where my anxiety went up worrying how they would survive. I'll also include here the performances. Christine as Kaleb was good. He is naïve, but he's also a good guy. He cares about this complex and the people inside. There is something that happened between him and Jordy, which is eating away at him. It adds heart when we finally learn what it is. Nyarko is good as his sister. She seems like she hates where they live, but there is more to it. That was good. I like Niel as his best friend. He isn't dumb, but he doesn't think things through. I love that he has his hero moments since we know that he's a former boxer and now an MMA fighter. Oldfield and Lesaffre were also good to round out our main group. Other than that, I thought the rest of the cast rounded this out for what was needed.
Before moving away completely, I did want to bring up social commentary here. What I read was that it was intentional to be set in a low-income development. This shows not only that this place needs repairs, but that the police coming to help is delayed. It also shows their disregard for getting people out. I'll say that this is a double-edged sword. Part of it is that they need to ensure no spiders get out. It also feels like everyone living here is expendable. That adds tension knowing that. I thought that was well-done without being over the top.
Let's then finish this out with filmmaking. The big thing here would be effects. My guess is that there were real spiders used where they could be. The rest was CGI. It looks good though. Part of that is this building is dark inside. The shadows help to hide things. That also allows the spiders to run rampant. The attack scenes were great. It made me uncomfortable. I'll also credit the cinematography and the framing. The setting is great. Other than that, the sound design also adds to this. Hearing the noises the spiders make made my skin crawl. I'll credit that as well.
In conclusion, this movie lived up to the hype for me. I thought that it had a simple premise that it took seriously. Taking this deadly spider that the people living in this building don't know about and then it goes unchecked is terrifying. The effects were great, as was the cinematography, framing and sound design. Character development is also a big help. I know info about each one and care about what happens to them. This is one that I'll revisit before the end of the year to see how it holds up with a second watch. I'd recommend this one for sure. Be warned, it is French so I watched it with subtitles. To be honest, there isn't a lot of dialogue so that helps.
My Rating: 8 out of 10.
Mononoke-hime (1997)
Beautiful Animation and Rich Story
This was a movie that I remember hitting the movie channels when I was a growing up. I would have been ten years old. I vividly remember seeing a character fire an arrow and rip the arms of someone. Up until this point, the only adult oriented cartoon I'd seen was Fire and Ice. It was one that I didn't fully understand so it isn't one I watched often. Jaime and I had this on a list of movies to see due to working through an Internet Movie Database poster of the top 100 films according to rating at that time. Jaime was leery, but we got to see this at the Gateway Film Center, so that added something for both of us.
We start this off with a demon heading toward a village. Ashitaka (voiced by Billy Crudup) does what he can to save his people and in turn, he's cursed. He starts a journey to see why this demon was on the rampage. This leads him into the middle of a war between Lady Eboshi (voiced by Minnie Driver) and the spirit of the forest. The former is trying to make Iron Town the strongest and richest. To do this, she needs the forest and mountains around them. Moro (voiced by Gillian Anderson) is a giant wolf who has three children helping her. Two are wolves and other is San (Voiced by Claire Danes). There is also a corrupt monk, Jigo (voiced by Billy Bob Thornton), who is also there to defeat the spirit of the forest for the emperor.
What I'll say is that I think that gives a nutshell recap and introduction to important characters. Where I'll start is that I enjoyed my time with this. Jaime did as well. Her biggest gripe was that seeing this on a Friday, after working all week and the theater chairs not being all that comfortable. She still thought the product was good. Then for me, I was just captivated to how great the imaginary and animation were. I'd get lost in it and forget I'm watching a cartoon. That's a credit to the filmmaking.
There's also a great message here. Ashitaka is torn between both sides. He's a human so he wants to help Lady Eboshi, but not to kill the forest. There are evil samurai here so he fights against them. I'd say if anything, he's not on the side of the emperor and that includes Jigo. He falls in love with San, who even though she's human, doesn't see herself that way. She was raised by wolves. He fights for the forest. I love the message here about humanity and nature living in harmony. It is a battle to find common ground.
I'd also say the different mythology we see is great. There are these cute little forest spirits that are also creepy. I want one to live in my house. We see the forest spirit as an elk with a human face. This entity also becomes a night walker, which was interesting to see. This forest also has talking wolves, boars and gorillas. This is supposed to have taken place in the past. It even feels that the events of this movie are the reason they no longer can. It is an interesting idea to explore.
Now I've already said that this is expertly made. The version we watched was dubbed in English. It was jarring hearing Thornton, Driver or Danes say names like Ashitaka or Lady Eboshi, but I got over that soon after. They all fit their characters. The best being Thornton as it almost seems like Jigo is his Bad Santa character, just a corrupt monk. This is a movie that I'd highly recommend, even if you don't like anime. It is so well done and just toes the line of being out of the realm of believability. There's just a great story in my opinion that makes it come together.
My Rating: 8.5 out of 10.
The 50 Best Horror Movies You've Never Seen (2014)
Solid Documentary and List of Movies
This was a documentary that caught my attention when looking for something to watch at work. I was curious coming in as to the number I had seen and if I hadn't, did I at least know of that movie? I'll give my totals, but this was an intriguing doc along with the people that were interviewed.
Where to start though would be assessing the list, I had seen 40 of the 50 movies. Of the 10 that I hadn't, I think only one of them was one that I hadn't heard of. One that I hadn't was Joshua from 2007, that was a completely new one. There were ones like Grace, The Fury, Lemora: A Child's Tale of the Supernatural and Burnt Offerings, that I knew of, just hadn't seen yet. They're all on my high priority list for one reason or another. I do think that including the original Wrong Turn, Wishmaster or the original Black Christmas on this list are a disservice. There are more obscure movies that would benefit talking about more. I will credit though the ones that I hadn't seen as well as ones like Alone in the Dark or Tourist Trap that are just oddball ones that need to be seen more.
There are also a solid group of people here, from talking heads to filmmakers and actors. There is like Arnold T. Blumberg, Arielle Brachfeld, Brian W. Collins, Heidi Honeycutt, Kim Morgan, and Brad Miska to name experts/historians in the field. They interviewed scream queens Michelle Bauer, P. J. Soles, Brinke Stevens and Linnea Quigley. I also recognized John Gulager, Brea Grant, Ryan Turek and Philippe Mora as well.
What I'll also say is that this isn't going as in-depth as it could. They give good information, present the film and reactions people have to the work. I like that this one scratched beneath the surface a bit more than others. This runs two hours long and it flew by. I'm not saying that this one is great, but I think it works for what they're doing to offer up less talked about horror gems, for the most part.
My Rating: 8 out of 10.
Leprechaun 6: Back 2 Tha Hood (2003)
Solid Installment to a Middling Franchise
This was a movie that I'll be honest, I avoided when I saw it hit the movie channels. I didn't see the one before this for the same reason. It wasn't until getting into horror movie podcasts that I decided to work through the series. Since I'm celebrating St. Patrick's Day on the Journey with a Cinephile: A Horror Movie Podcast. This is the next one up.
Synopsis: when Emily Woodrow (Tangi Miller) and her friends happen on a treasure chest full of gold coins, they do not heed the warnings of a wise old psychic, who foretold that they would meet trouble with a nasty and protective Leprechaun (Warwick Davis).
We start this out learning the lore of the leprechauns. There was a king who enlisted their aid to protect his gold. All of them returned to where they came from except for one. That would be the Leprechaun we get here. It then shifts to the present day. We have Father Jacob (Willie C. Carpenter) who battles the mythical creature on the site of what is going to be a youth center. He seems to defeat it as the monster is pulled into the ground.
The movie then shifts a year into the future. Father Jacob died during that battle and the construction of the youth center with him. Hanging outside out of the construction site are Emily with her friend Lisa (Sherrie Jackson). With them is Jamie (Page Kennedy). It is during this that we see Rory (Laz Alonso) who used to see Emily. They broke up when he took money from Emily to start dealing drugs. He is now seeing Chanel (Keesha Sharp). Jamie is also attacked by another group of drug dealers. Their boss is Watson (Shiek Mahmud-Bey) and he rolls up with Cedric (Sticky Fingaz). Jamie owes them money and he's short. Rory comes to his aid and this causes Watson to tell him he had better watch himself.
Emily and Lisa throw a cookout at the construction site. Jamie invited Rory, which upsets Emily. These two go off to talk and she falls through the floor. It is while she waits for Rory to get a ladder or rope that she finds a chest full of gold coins. She decides to split it with the group. She doesn't want Rory or Jamie to use it on drugs, which they do. By them spending this, the Leprechaun wakes up and he searches for his gold. He kills anyone who gets in his way to get it back.
That is where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the characters. What I like here is that we get more continuity than other sequels in this series. They don't reference the movie before this, but it also doesn't do anything to violate that one either. Another thing that I'll give this one credit, it is written by a Black man. The references to the culture feel real and less awkward than the previous installment so that helped as well.
A big thing that I also want to credit is that I love the back-story that we have. This idea that a king enlisted the aid of the leprechauns is great. I love that the rest of them left after they were no longer needed. It is just this one that stayed to protect the gold. It feels like this one is rogue which is good. I do still think there is missed opportunities. Something that the synopsis brought up that I didn't know was the idea that Emily sees a psychic with Lisa. The psychic keeps getting names wrong, but she warns Emily about a fortune that will come her way and how she needs to avoid it. She doesn't, of course, so that sets the events in motion. I love that the Leprechaun almost seems to fear the psychic and calls her a witch. He won't even mess with her until she interferes. The idea here though is that the only people who are killed either try to stop him or are showing greed of his gold.
I've already touched on this, but I do love having the Leprechaun attacking this neighborhood. I can't fault the characters that when they find the gold they spend it. This is the same argument that I made when it came to college athletes who were busted for accepting benefits. You normally saw it from teens that came from nothing. They don't know good spending habits so it tracks. The idea that a greedy Leprechaun would have run ins with people who don't have anything so they spend newfound money selfishly makes sense and works. I wanted to credit that.
Let me then shift to acting. I'll be honest, it isn't great. This also isn't working with the biggest budget either. Davis though is once again on point with not only looking menacing but hitting the one-liners. I appreciate him for doing this when he was already taking on Star Wars movies as well as ones in Harry Potter. Miller and Jackson are fine as best friends. Kennedy adds comedy which worked for me. Alonso was fine as this drug dealer who used to be a part of this group. What is confusing there is that he still loves Emily, but he is also dating Chanel. Donzaleigh Abernathy is good as Esmerlda the psychic. This is a limited role. Mahmud-Bey, Fingaz and his crew were good. I'd say the supporting cast are almost caricatures, but that's fine for a supernatural slasher like this.
All that is left then is filmmaking. I'd say that the cinematography is fine. We are capturing that this is a low-income area. Seeing this group buy things that they don't need makes sense. It also fits why the monster is after them. The effects were fine. This leans more into the CGI than the practical ones. I do wish we got more of the latter. This doesn't ruin the movie either though. I'd also say that the soundtrack is fine. It does have rap style music that once again would fit.
In conclusion, I had more enjoyment here than other of the latter sequels. This is a franchise that is middling even with the best ones. The bright spot is Davis's performance as the Leprechaun and the make-up is on point. His comedy also lands. The rest of the cast is fine. I do like the extra back-story we have here. This is made well enough. The practical effects are good, but we get a bit too much CGI in general. Again, this is one of the better sequels which is impressive for being this far into the series. I'd only recommend it if you enjoy these movies and want to see a supernatural slasher being done by a mythical creature.
My Rating: 5.5 out of 10.
Das Wachsfigurenkabinett (1924)
Solid Silent, German Expressionist Anthology Film
This was a movie that I discovered when searching for horror films from 1924 for my Centennial Club. The title was interesting, since I know there is the movie from 1988 that I watched years ago. I saw the cast that we were working with here of Emil Jannings, Conrad Veidt and Werner Krauss, who I've seen in other films from the era. I was curious as to what we'd get here.
Synopsis: a wax museum hires a writer to give the sculptures stories. The writer imagines himself and the museum owner's daughter in them.
That synopsis is good in setting how this starts. The writer is played by William Dieterle and I believe he's credited here as the poet. He has a paper with the wanted information for a wax museum within a carnival. He enters and inquires about the position. His audition is to write stories for Harun al Raschid (Jannings), Ivan the Terrible (Veidt) and Jack the Ripper (Krauss).
This is an early anthology where we go into the first story about Harun. He is the ruler of Baghdad. He plays chess daily with his Grand Vizier (Paul Biensfeldt), to help keep him sharp mentally. Assad the Baker (Dieterle) is making bread outside of the palace and the smoke upsets Harun after he loses the game. He wants the baker's head. The Grand Vizier learns that Assad has a beautiful wife, played by Olga Belajeff. Harun has a different wife each day and he flirts with her to steal her away. She fought with Assad over ruining her only dress, so he made a pact to steal a ring from Harun to get back in her good graces. This starts a series of events that will change all their lives.
Then we jump over to the story written about Ivan the Terrible. He has a poison maker, played by Ernst Legal, who writes the name of someone on hourglasses. When the sand runs out, they die. Ivan has his name for good reason. He distrusts those around him and thinks that they're out to kill him. A friend asks him to the wedding of his daughter and Ivan thinks it is an assassination attempt. He hides as the driver of the chariot. This creates an issue as Belajeff is set to marry Dieterle. Ivan's name is also erroneously written on an hourglass when it should be the poison makers.
Our last story is interesting as our poet has a run in with Jack the Ripper or as he writes about him, Spring-Heeled Jack. This was clever as to what they do here.
That is where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the characters. Where I want to start is that it was interesting to see an early horror anthology. Not all the stories fall into this genre, but I think the first one does flirt with it enough. There is something happens with Harun that makes Assad think he's killed him. I also love what they do here with our wraparound of the poet creating stories about these real characters. Even more so that the last one centers around the writer.
Since this has the same team behind all of them, I'll treat this just as a movie overall. The first story is more whimsical, but Harun is the only focal that isn't a tyrant or villain. He's not good though either as he is out to seduce the baker's wife. What he does though to save face as well as to prevent Assad from being killed though is good. It is clever and quick thinking by the wife. The Ivan story is a bit long, but I love how it ends. It shows how evil this character is and it fits where it concludes. It is like a mirror to the first one, but the lead is getting comeuppance.
Then for the last one, even though it feels rushed, I thought it was the most unique. I looked at the runtime and tried to figure out what they'd do. I don't want to spoil it, but it was creative to me. What I'll say is that after telling the first two stories, I could see the poet doing what he does here. It would also be terrifying to be pursued by Jack the Ripper. Being as early into cinema as we are, I like that this idea was used already. This is also not based off specific stories, but we are using historical figures in fictional ways from my understanding.
That should be enough for the story so let me go over to the acting. Our three leads are great. Jannings feels like this jovial Harun who can be quick to anger. It is a different role than what I'm used to from Faust. Veidt is amazing as this villainous Ivan. He does well with his body language and being menacing, if not downright evil. Krauss also works in his limited role as Jack the Ripper. I'd also say that I like Dieterle and Belajeff playing the characters who interact with these figures. They take on different roles so we're seeing their range. I'd also say that Biensfeldt, John Gottowt, Georg John and Legal, along with any other actors helped round this out for what was needed.
All that is left then is filmmaking. This falls into German Expressionism and I love that. It adds a surreal feel, especially since these are three tales that are being crafted by the poet. Since we aren't seeing real life, I love that the world doesn't match that. The last one feels like a nightmare as well. I'm just a fan of the sets when they use this. We don't get much of the way of effects, but this is early into the history of cinema, so they had to be in camera. The makeup to make the actors look like the characters or people from that time they existed worked. The last thing would be the soundtrack. I can't be fully sure if the music synced with the images was what they used originally. I did like what they used for the version on YouTube. It helped build the atmosphere.
In conclusion, I rather enjoyed this early anthology film. We have heavy hitter actors in my opinion with Veidt, Krauss and Jannings, especially for the horror genre. It is creative to have this poet who is writing stories for these historical figures. I thought this was well-made. The sets used capture the surreal thanks to expressionism made me smile. I'm a sucker for them. I also thought the makeup and costumes fit the characters to help capture that allusion. The soundtrack that we got also adds to the atmosphere. I'd recommend it if you are out to see silent era horror films or the history of this genre.
My Rating: 8.5 out of 10.
Tarot (2024)
Good Things, But Jump Scare Fest
This was a movie that I heard was coming out. It didn't come to the Gateway Film Center, so I didn't even realize that it was out until friends of mine were seeing it. I saw that I could catch it at the AMC by me and checked it out on the Sunday of opening weekend. The ratings and thoughts were in the middle to not very good. I was still curious, especially after learning it is from a pulp novel from the 1990s.
Synopsis: when a group of friends recklessly violates the sacred rule of Tarot readings, they unknowingly unleash an unspeakable evil trapped within the cursed cards. One by one, they come face to face with fate and end up in a race against death.
The group from the synopsis are college age and staying at a house they rented for the weekend in the Catskills mountains. This takes place in the New England area and it sets this up by everyone drinking Sam Adams beer. Our lead is Haley (Harriet Slater). She was seeing Grant (Adain Bradley), but they recently broke up. None of this friend group even knew. Both are here, which makes it awkward when this gets revealed. Also, there is Madeline (Humberly González) who has a crush on Lucas (Wolfgang Novogratz). Another couple here is Paige (Avantika) and Elise (Larsen Thompson). It is the latter's birthday as well. Then our last friend is the comedian of the group, Paxton (Jacob Batalon).
They end up running out of beer. Paxton is convinced there must be a secret stash. This leads them to a room that is locked. Lucas breaks the lock and it goes to the basement. Inside is astrology items. They also find a box with runes carved into it. They find a creepy set of tarot cards within. Haley got into card readings to tell horoscopes and her friends want her to do one for them. She declines, saying that it is bad luck to use someone else's deck. They convince her though.
This is their entertainment for the night. Haley takes what she is doing seriously. The readings she does seem to have ominous omens, especially since they end with cards like the hermit, the magician, the countess, the devil and death. These cards don't necessarily have the same direct meanings. Everyone goes back to their normal lives, but something seems to follow them back. Something supernatural seems to be after them, even though it can been seen as unfortunate accidents. They need to figure out the history behind this deck before it is too late.
That is where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the characters. Where I'll start is that this has good aspects here. I like the idea of doing tarot card readings to tell horoscopes and then something bad happen to these people. There is a nitpick that I have and I'll get into that shortly. I can also explain it away easily enough. This deck being as creepy as it was great. Having now seen this, I can see the gripes that others have and they're like mine.
Now that we have that out of the way, let me delve deeper. I'll go in order. I've already said that I like the premises. Finding this old tarot deck and telling 'futures' from it works. It does feel like subbing out a Ouija board for the cards and then something supernatural coming after our characters. I'll give credit here still. My nitpick is that Haley says about how you're not supposed to use someone's else's deck to tell readings. Then she just goes ahead and uses them anyway. She seems to believe in what she's doing and takes the outcomes of the readings seriously. I don't buy that she would do it then. This is a nitpick and peer pressure is something that I could see changing her mind so I'll digress. I don't believe in astrology or that cards like this tell the future, but I know people do so I'm not going to rain on their parade. I do like this entity of the Astrologer (Suncica Milanovic) and how she factors in as well.
Next, I think I'll take this to filmmaking. I'll say here again, I love the card design for this tarot deck. I've seen cool ones in the past and have seen classic designs. Having them being as horrific as they was great. That adds to the atmosphere. Then bringing these entities to life was something else that as great. My guess is that they went CGI. I still thought they looked creepy so I'll credit there. My bigger issue is that instead of working more on the atmosphere, they chose to go more for jump-scares. It also feels like it is borrowing from Final Destination with how hauntings play out. This is designed more for mainstream audiences and it doesn't work as well for me. The sound design fits in there. This isn't poorly made. I thought that the cinematography and framing do good things. It gets creepy at times. They just don't build on that as well as they could.
I'll go over the acting then. No one is bad here, let me say that. I just got annoyed with how the characters were written. For me, I think part of that is these are college age people now. If I was still that age, I think I could connect better. I thought that Slater was fine as our lead. Bradley works as her ex, but we know there is still feelings there. Their breakup is fresh so that contributes. They both are attractive so that helps. Batalon adds humor which was good. Avantika, González, Novogratz and Thompson round out this group. They don't do well in fleshing them out either to help me care when things happen to them. Their horoscope seems to be the extent of what we know about them. That is creative way to introduce them, I'll say that. Olwen Fouéré works as this expert they seek out to learn more. I liked seeing that James Swanton was here to take on a couple of the entities. I'll also credit Nikolic, Milanovic and Carter there as well.
There isn't much more to say here. In conclusion, this is fine. I'm not the target audience as this is designed more for mainstream fans who are in that PG-13 range. We get jump-scares instead of atmosphere. That's not to say this is all bad. I thought the look of the tarot cards were great. The concept that by doing readings with the deck, it has cursed this group of friends. The acting was fine. Our characters just lack depth in my opinion, outside of what we learn from the readings. The framing and cinematography were fine. Even though they went CGI mostly for the entities, they still looked creepy. This just doesn't do enough to set itself apart and I think this will be forgotten unfortunately. I'd recommend this to fans of more of the more conventional horror films.
My Rating: 5.5 out of 10.
Baghead (2023)
Solid Variation on the Seance/Witch Film
This is a movie that I heard about through podcasts. I know that Duncan, from the Podcast Under the Stairs, covered this one and even spoke to the director. It went on a list of movies to see for this year. Since there wasn't a new release at the theater that I'm a member at, I decided to watch this as a featured review.
Synopsis: a young woman inherits a run-down pub and discovers a dark secret within its basement - Baghead (Anne Müller) - a shape-shifting creature that will let you speak to lost loved ones, but not without consequences.
We start this off in the old pub from the synopsis. The owner is Owen (Peter Mullan). He decides that he's had enough and is going to kill this creature living in the basement. He records a video tape, giving instructions in case he fails. We then see him try to come up the stairs and he's on fire.
It then shifts us to meet our lead, Iris (Freya Allan). She was just evicted from her apartment due to not paying rent. She has no money. Her friend, Katie (Ruby Barker), helps her break into her former flat to steal things that she can carry. Iris is going to have to go back to a homeless shelter and she doesn't know what she is going to do. That's when she learns about her father dying. Katie buys her a plane ticket so she can settle the estate.
Iris meets with a solicitor, played by Ned Dennehy. She learns her father owns the pub. It has been left to her and she signs the deed. There is an issue here though. There are debts on the property so she can't sell it. She is drawn to the basement. The door has runes carved into it and she knows there is something not quite right here.
That's when Neil (Jeremy Irvine) comes inside. This spooks her as they're closed. He offered her two thousand dollars. It seems Owen was charging people to see the thing in the basement. She is unsure of what is going on here and Neil offers even more, up to four thousand. She takes what he has and tells him to come back the next day. Katie thinks it is a bad idea and she is coming to help. Iris lets Neil in and she discovers what is kept down there. A person comes from a crack in the wall. It has a bag on its head, which makes sense now for the name. Neil gives the thing a ring and then it removes the covering. Underneath is his dead mother. He asks questions and after two minutes, the responses turn dark.
Iris must decide what to do. Being as broke as she is, there is the prospect of using this entity and letting others speak to their relatives. Katie thinks this is a bad idea. Iris watches the video her father left and tries to make sense of what lives below. For two minutes at a time, she is in charge and Baghead must listen to her. Anything after that, Baghead does what it can to escape.
That is where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the characters. Where I want to start would be that even though this is a premise we've seen before, I like the variation we get here. This is a séance of sorts. There is just a dangerous entity that you are talking directly to. The rules here feel something like Talk to Me. This would be safer since you aren't inviting it in directly. There are other issues that stem here as well.
Then to explore this idea more, I like how they set up this pub, Iris, her father as well as the entity. It is thanks to Katie and her interaction with this creature that we get information from the ghost of an earlier owner, Otto Vogler (Felix Römer). The question that I have, how can you fully trust what this monster is saying? I know it looks like a loved one, but our characters know that it isn't them under the bag. We get glimpses as it puts things in its mouth to change. I take this as these people are so desperate, they want to believe that it is them. This makes for an interesting dynamic in building the atmosphere.
I'd also say that I love this setting of the old pub. I like the lore that we get set up. It is late in the movie that we get more about it. The only thing that I'm fuzzy about is who the brotherhood is. We know how Baghead came to live in the basement, but was Owen a member of this group before taking over? Or is this trying to say that when people become the owner, this monster sees them that way. This doesn't need to be confirmed. Just something I was considering as things go to where they do.
One last thing about the lore, I love this idea that when you become the owner of this pub, as well as the creature, its magic affects you. It gives you access to seeing a loved one for 2 minutes without it lying, but the magic also has negative effects on your health. This seems like the idea that the runes holding it in the basement can only hold so much. The evil that it has become is able to seep through. I like that even in the limited time they are there, we see it affecting Iris. There's another aspect here that she has no money. This gives her a glimmer of hope, but at what cost?
I'll then take this to the acting. I thought that Allan was solid as our lead. I like the fact that she has hit rock bottom with her financial situation. It made me feel bad for her since her mother has died and was estranged from her father. There's desperation here where she must decide how much of her humanity is she willing to give up for money to get her life back on track. Barker is also good as her friend who wants to help. Iris is tired of fighting though, where Katie wants her to keep going. There is also this interesting character in Neil and how he factors in the deeper things go. He might not be as nice as he appears. Müller does good body movements for the creature. Mullan, Römer and the other ghosts are solid. I also like Dennehy as the solicitor in his limited role.
Then to finish out with filmmaking. I've already said that I like the setting. Having an old pub with history is good. The creepy basement adds to it. There is good mythology built here for Baghead. I'd also say the look is as well. The practical effects we get are good. My only gripe is with CGI. It doesn't ruin it though. The photoshopped pictures of people from the past aren't great. I can overlook that though. Something that made me uncomfortable was people separating and then going into the basement. It makes you not know who you can trust, which was good. I'd say that the sound design here was good as well. Overall, this is made well-enough.
In conclusion, I thought there were good things here. We're using ideas and concepts that we've seen before, just slightly different. I like the variation we get on the séance with Baghead. The lore and mythology they set up there was good. There are things with characters and their reactions that I don't know if they fully work. There is solid atmosphere built from the setting and interaction with this entity. The acting performances were good. Thought this was made well enough. My only gripes there are with the CGI and minor things used. This is worth a watch though, especially if you like movies like this.
My Rating: 7 out of 10.
Where the Crawdads Sing (2022)
Cliff Notes Version of the Novel
This was a movie that I was intrigued to check out since I read the book. My wife, Jaime, borrowed it from a co-worker. She was reading another book at the time so I decided to check it out. It was a fast read and thought that it did interesting things I wasn't expecting. Jaime finally read it and when we saw this streaming on Hulu, we decided to check it out.
We are following Kya Clark (Daisy Edgar-Jones) who is known as 'Marsh Girl'. It is a tragic story where her family slowly abandoned her and she had to make her own way. She isn't formally educated but does learn to read and write through a boy she falls in love with, Tate Walker (Taylor John Smith). Things happen there and they have a falling out. Kya is then pursued by Chase Andrews (Harris Dickinson). This isn't the picture-perfect relationship though and he ends up dying. Kya is accused of murdering him and a local lawyer, Tom Milton (David Strathairn) wants to prove that maybe she is innocent.
What I'll say is that having read the book first, this movie falls short for me. There is a good idea here. We are seeing a tragic story of Kya who is left to fend for herself in the swamplands of South Carolina. Her family was poor growing up and there weren't many prospects for her. We see her mother, played by Ahna O'Reilly, leave her abusive father, played by Garret Dillahunt. Her siblings all then leave as they get older as well. She tries to go to school once, but she is bullied so she decides to just figure out life on her own.
There is then this part in her life where she opens to Tate. This leads to heartbreak for her to where she isolates again. He did open her eyes though to publishers who might have a need for the inner information she has about the wildlife and marshlands where she lives. She is an expert having grown up around them. It is around this time that the local sports star, Chase, shows interest. He isn't a good guy though and this leads to scary things in her life.
What I'll say is that the acting of Edgar-Jones is fine. Smith works as this guy who is kind to her, but he makes horrible decisions. Dickinson is great as this charmer. The best performances though are Strathairn as the lawyer. What I like is a scene this shows where he's nice to Kya as a girl. He could do more though. Michael Hyatt and Sterling Macer Jr. Are good as Mabel and Jumpin' who know Kya as a girl. They're afraid to help but do what they can. I also thought that Bill Kelly and Dillahunt were solid in their roles as well.
To circle back to reading the book I think hurt this for me, there is just aspects left out of the movie. I understand why. A novel allows it to go more in-depth with things. A movie needs to move at a pace where it doesn't get borrowing and you're still giving the information needed. That causes little things that are important to be left out at times. I will say that there isn't bad filmmaking here. The cinematography and framing are good. There is CGI here, but it is for animals so I'm not going to harp there. I also thought that the soundtrack was fine.
The biggest gripe I'll say is that this just feels like a cliff notes version of the story. It is fine to watch, but if you truly want to capture the magic, you need to read the book in my opinion.
My Rating: 6.5 out of 10.
Orlacs Hände (1924)
Solid Direction and Performance from Veidt
This was a movie that I learned about after watching The Beast with Five Fingers. These are both based off the same novel by Maurice Renard. It's been a while since I saw that film. I know that I enjoyed it. That movie caused me to seek out the different variations on it, including this earlier take on the novel. It also doubles as a Centennial Club selection as well as a Foray through the Fours.
Synopsis: a world-famous pianist loses both hands in an accident. When new hands are grafted on, he doesn't know they once belonged to a murderer.
Now for this movie here, we have a married couple. Yvonne Orlac (Alexandra Sorina) is awaiting her husband to come home from his latest tour. Paul is the pianist from the synopsis. On his way home, there is a mishap that results in a train accident. Yvonne went to meet him at the station, but upon hearing about the tragedy, her driver takes her to the location where it happened. There is mayhem and death. She finds her husband inside one of the cars. He's alive but hurt.
This lands him in the hospital with a broken skull and maimed hands. Dr. Serral (Hans Homma) learns about what happened to his friend. This coincides with the same day that a thief and murderer, Vasseur, is set to be executed. Dr. Serral sees an opportunity to help Paul. It will be an experimental treatment though.
Yvonne knows what was done. Paul hasn't learned the truth yet. When he comes to and the bandages are removed, he sees that his hands aren't the ones that he's born with. This makes him concerned that he'll no longer be able to play the piano. He also gets a start when in his hospital room he sees a floating head through a window into his room. It belongs to Fritz Kortner. He believes this to be the original owner of the hands he now has.
Paul then goes about learning who they belonged to. This brings him to learn of Vasseur and the crimes he was executed for. Paul feels like he can't control them and that they want to do bad things like the original owner. This leads to him sleepwalking. Yvonne is concerned as money starts to run out. This leads her to Paul's father, who despises his son. There is also an encounter with a character by the name of Nera who might know more about their situation. Murders start to happen again, with Vasseur's fingerprints and knife being used. Paul can't account for everything he does and starts to wonder if his hands have continued the work of the original owner.
That is where I'm going to leave my recap and introduction to the story. We don't have the deepest one here and I learned through bonus features on the DVD that I have, this story took the basic premise, a bit of the subplots, but ultimately cut quite a bit to create this movie. This runs for 105 minutes. I could only imagine how long this would be if they kept more from the original story in.
Where I want to start will be with the character of Paul Orlac. This is a study about him. Since this is a silent film, we need title cards and acting to convey what it needs to. Having Veidt in this role is perfect. He does so much with facial expressions and body language that it worked. What is interesting is that we don't get much of a baseline. This tends to be a problem for me, but I think just setting up that he's a famous concert pianist who can no longer play. That makes sense and we don't need more than that. It is from there that we see this character descend into madness.
There's an interesting commentary from this point about our body no longer working as it once did. I could see an allegory here to getting old and arthritis or similar ailments taking away things that we used to be able to do. This happens much more quickly in this work. I'd also say that this movie is saying that it could be in the head of Paul. I did read in the special features as well that this last bit is a concept from the novel. If this happened to Yvonne, she would be strong enough to overcome. Paul on the other hand is weaker of mind and lacks confidence so it makes sense that he'd descend into the madness that he does. I found this concept to be fascinating.
Now there's another angle here with the character of Nera. He meets with their maid of Regine and she gives him the knife that belonged to Vasseur. Nera also seeks out Paul to tell him that he's framed him. Money is demanded for extortion since the fingerprints at the scene belong to Vasseur and these hands are the ones that Paul now has. There is a bit of sci-fi here how this plays out, but it is still grounded. It's something you'd find in a detective story so I can work with it. There's also a built-in motive for Paul that would make him a suspect as well. Since he's already going crazy, he buys in that during a sleepwalking incident or blacking out, he did kill this man. I thought that worked.
That should be enough for the story so I'll go over to the rest of the acting. I've already said that Veidt is great here. I also thought that Sorina was good as his wife. She cares so much about him and wants to help. She is also afraid of him, wondering what he would do with these hands. Fritz Strassny was good as the mean father of Paul. He's good at setting the stage to the climax. His butler, Paul Askonas, works in his minor role. I also like Cartellieri, Homma and Kortner with how they fit into the story.
All that is left then is filmmaking. I thought that the cinematography here was good. We are early in the history of cinema so they're limited to what they could do. What is interesting is that Weine is known for his work in expressionism. We get that here, but on a lesser scale. This is more grounded while taking concepts from that movement. There are in camera effects that we get to show that Paul is haunted by the specter of his hands. This is in his head though. I still like what they do there. Other than that, this isn't the soundtrack that was synced up originally. I did like what was done though as it fit what was needed. If I have a gripe, this is too long. I think this could be condensed to around 90 minutes, still convey what was needed and run tighter.
In conclusion, this is a solid film from early cinema. It explores interesting ideas that still work today. I like seeing this character of Paul lose the ability of his hands and then sink into madness worrying about the ones that he now has. Veidt is great here at bringing the character to life. The rest of the cast push him to where he ends up. I thought that filmmaking was good. My only gripe there is that this runs too long. Trimming this would still get across what they need to while running tighter. This is one that I can only recommend if you are interested in the history of cinema. I enjoyed my time here and seeing another film featuring Wiene and Veidt.
My Rating: 8 out of 10.
Killer Legends (2014)
Documentary That Explores Urban Legends in a Grounded Way
This was a documentary that I watched while working since I knew it was one that if something came in, I could oversee. I treated this like a podcast. What I didn't realize though until settling in was that this was the same writer/director of Cropsey. That was a documentary that I went in thinking one thing and then got something else completely. It was in a good way. This is in a similar vein as well.
What we're getting here is Joshua Zeman who is the writer, director and co-stars with Rachel Mills, who is an investigative researcher. They are taking on four urban legends to see if there are any truth to them. The first one they focused on was 'The Hook'. This leads them to Texarkana where they look at the 'Phantom Killer' and the events of The Town that Dreaded Sundown. There is also the 'Candy Man' which turns out to be the 'Halloween Sadist' and why we were warned as children about checking Halloween candy. There is the babysitter dealing with 'The Caller' and the real murder that could be influenced. Finally, there is the idea of 'killer clowns' and why they scare us.
The biggest thing that made this work for me was the depth they go into each of these urban legends and to have this all in a runtime of 90 minutes. Could they have lingered on things longer? Probably, but I think how each is handled gives all the information they can find. Part of the issue here is that things happened in the 40s or the 50s for some. Others are just too difficult to corroborate. Regardless, they explore and provide all the information to allow us to decide. I'm glad that they don't lean too hard in trying to prove their point. I was also a fan to see this duo going to different places, interviewing people or local historians. Seeing the actual locations adds an element for me.
I'll add on to that this is well-done. It feels professional, which is great. Something I wasn't expecting was editing different footage to help explain what they're doing. We know that urban legends have a great impact on all of us and how we heard these tales through the grapevine. Seeing how it influenced films like The Town that Dreaded Sundown, Candyman, When a Stranger Calls or IT! I think that it gives us something interesting to watch while we're hearing Zeman narrate. Then to also hear from people who know more about each case, which adds to the validity of the conclusions that are drawn. The cinematography is good as well as the sound design for me.
If you like true crime documentaries and want to see a grounded approach to urban legends, I think that this does well in pinpointing possible starting places for each. This flies by and it was interesting to view.
My Rating: 8 out of 10.
The 50 Worst Movies Ever Made (2004)
Needed More to Make this Work Better
This is a documentary that I found streaming on Freevee. It intrigued me partially to see how many of them I've watched. Also, to see how titles that I recognized. Now I did need to preface here, there is a good amount of horror films on here which both makes me laugh and bummed about my favorite genre.
There are titles on here for good reason. I believe that Ed Wood Jr. Has three titles on here, which doesn't shock me. There are also a good number of 'ape films' that made the list. These are ones that feature people inside gorilla suits, which was popular in the 40s and 50s. Ones that made the list that I've seen are The Ape and Robot Monster. There are good ones in this subgenre, but they tend to be on the lower ending rating-wise in general.
I also feel there are movies on here that don't belong. Is Troll from 1986 a good movie? No, but it isn't close to being the worst. I'd also say that with J. D. Revenge or Spider Baby or, the Maddest Story Ever Told. These are decent movies where I think there is more low hanging fruit that could be discussed.
There isn't much to the production value either. The clips they show and explaining over top with narration was solid. The graphics in between are funny with how cheap they look. I'm not going to hold against this too much though, since we are making a list of the 'worst movies ever made'. They also don't do too much in depth here. This is an hour long and it rifles through all 50 quite quickly. I would have been fine if this would have slowed down a bit to give more, but again, these are considered bad movies so there is that.
I'd recommend it if you are into bad movies. There are ones on here that are so bad, they're good. These tend to have low budgets. It was a fun time killer at work for me so there is that.
My Rating: 6 out of 10.
Children of the Corn (1984)
One of the Better King Adapations
This was a film that I had seen when I started to seek out horror films growing up, especially ones that were based on Stephen King works. It came from one of his short stories in the collection, Night Shift. I was a big fan of the story, even naming my first dog Malachi. This rewatch was for my Foray through the Fours.
Synopsis: a young couple is trapped in a remote town where a dangerous religious cult of children believes everyone over the age of 18 must be killed.
The concept of this film is terrifying. It didn't bother me when I was younger, but the moment I turned 18, this starts to be even scarier. Religion is something that makes me nervous, because of how deeply people take it and use it to influence their decisions.
In this we get Isaac (John Franklin) who is the leader of this cult. Everyone started to follow him because he was a child minister. When an entity that lives in the corn, He Who Walks Behind the Rows, starts talking to him and telling him what to do, they create a cult that follows its word. The scary thing is, I could see something like this happening in an area like we see here in Gatlin, Nebraska. Being in the heart of the Bible belt and if you have a charismatic leader.
The opening sequence of this film is great. It takes place three years before the events of the film. We see Isaac and his followers killing off all the adults. This is narrated by Job (Robby Kiger). Malachi (Courtney Gains) is the one to conduct the acts along with others while their leader looks on.
We then shift to present time. We have a couple in a hotel room. Burt (Peter Horton) is a new doctor and on the way to Seattle to start an internship. With him is his girlfriend, Vicky (Linda Hamilton), who wants him to commit. It is his birthday and they are spending it driving across rural Nebraska. They end up hitting a boy and need to look for help. The thing is and Burt notices, the boy was attacked before they collided with him. They try to go to Hemingford Home, by the words of Diehl (R. G. Armstrong), but they end up in Gatlin.
That is where I'll leave my recap and introduction to the characters. Where I want to start with something I found interesting watching this as an adult is how Fascist their society is. One of my favorite parts of this is the folklore that is set up with that.
Delving deeper here, we know that on the start of their 19th birthday, they need to sacrifice themselves to their god. Malachi doesn't want them to have any vices. Job and Sarah (Anne Marie McEvoy) do sneak off to abandoned homes to listen to music, play games and she likes to draw. Malachi catches them and wants them punished but Isaac sees that Sarah draws images of the future. He believes that she has the ability of sight and that He Who Walks Behind the Rows is giving her these. Also, from there is that Malachi doesn't agree with Isaac and there is dissension between them. There is a Lovecraftian vibe here to the entity. I know King is a big fan of him. There is a comment about how this entity has always been here that it feels he's an elder god. We get supernatural things, but I like how it is subtle. It is revealed to us, but not to characters until later.
Where I'll then go is over to the pacing which is good. This never hits any lulls and we get tension built throughout. The atmosphere of this town being empty is part of that. It doesn't waste time with the parents being massacred. The couple gets an uneasy feeling when they turn on the radio and the oppressiveness of the corn that is around them. We get POV shots of people watching the couple, which adds to that uneasy feeling. The tension continues to grow until we get to the climax. I thought the ending was fitting and it is built from an image we got earlier. I'm a big fan of callbacks like this.
Next then should be the acting performances. Being that it is mostly children and teens, I thought it was solid. Horton was good as the rational, educated adult who is trying to show the children what they're doing is wrong. Hamilton was also solid as the woman who is clinging to the man she loves, but she can't get him to commit. Their dynamic is interesting. I do have an issue that grates on me though, even though I like both characters. Franklin is creepy in his role. He sounds like any religious leader and he's perfectly cast. When everyone is following him, he seems powerful. When Gains tries to take the power and everyone follows him, Isaac becomes weak. What happens at the end is great. I like Gains as the enforcer. He has such an angry look. It might be over the top, but it's iconic for that. Kiger and McEvoy are fine. The rest of the cast rounded out the film well for what was needed as well.
All that is left then is the rest of the filmmaking. The opening sequence and scenes with action look good. They were practical and the blood looked real. There were a couple of deaths that I wish they wouldn't have cut away to show us a little more. This doesn't ruin it though. I'd say that the cinematography and framing are good. Watching our couple without them knowing is eerie. The setting in the cornfield can be disorienting. Now to showing He Who Walks Behind the Rows. They have it partly be like a groundhog and moving under the ground like Bugs Bunny. That can be seen as comical, but it doesn't ruin anything. I'll say that the callbacks to images we see is great though. The last bit is the soundtrack. The music that Job and Sarah listen to are songs I have a fondness for. When they use the choir sounding music by children is always creepy to me. It fit and works overall for what was needed.
In conclusion, this was a film that I've grown up with and still enjoy. It has its flaws, but none of them glaring though. It is interesting that it is still relevant. There are issues with religion and societies that are created around it. The Lovecraftian vibe is something I also like. I thought the acting was solid across the board. No one is bad, which is a good thing when dealing with teens and children. I'd also say this is well-made from the setting, cinematography, framing and soundtrack. I think there is a deeper story here that explores intriguing ideas. This is one that if you haven't seen, it should be at least once. Won't be for everyone, but it is still one of the better King adaptations.
My Rating: 8 out of 10.