“In A Violent Nature” is a 2024 slasher film with a twist. The movie takes the killer perspective idea (Used so effectively in the intro of “Halloween” (1978)). The movie is written and directed by Chris Nash and is his feature length debut. Chris previous made short films including one entry for “ABC’s of Death 2”. Ry Barrett plays the killer “Johnny” and Andrea Pavlovic plays final girl “Kris”. The story begins with a group of teenagers taking a necklace they find hanging on the remains of a fire tower in the woods. This wakes up long dead killer Johnny who sets out to recover his necklace.
As the story progresses and Johnny starts to kill everyone in his way as he searches for his necklace we gradually learn the killers backstory. As a child he was tricked up to the fire tower where someone scared him and he fell to his death. Later Johnny’s father confronted the killers and dies in the ensuing brawl. The local folk law is that the vengeful spirit of Johnny has been responsible for two killing sprees decades apart. Eventually Johnny narrows his sights on a young woman called Kris and her boyfriend Colt (Cameron Love) who desperately attempt to fight back.
Not Every Idea Is A Good One
This is an attempt to bring some art and perhaps originality to the slasher sub-genre and I applaud the attempt, but for most part the art detract from the atmosphere. Since we are following the silent killer and not the victims, we don’t really get to know any of the characters. I didn’t find myself caring at all about any of them, including the killer. They are all about as generic as slasher film characters come. Some of the scenes are approached in interesting ways but none of this is consistent. We switch from observing a murder quietly from a distance in a detached way, to a horror effects guys wet dream a few minutes later. The ending even abandons the killers perspective gimmick, making it feel tacked on from another film.
While conceptually interesting, in practice this is a movie that falls flat. It feels like the writers just threw together every idea they thought was “Cool”. Then packed it with a vague Jason Voorheese knockoff story. As a result, some of the scenes in isolation are pretty cool (For various reasons). As a full movie however, it’s hard to really feel much of anything for it. While not a complete disaster it is a disappointment. “Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon” (2006), did the killers perspective better admittedly in a more meta and dark comedy way. This was more like someone watched the opening of “Halloween” (1978) and wanted that to be the entire movie. Had John Carpenter done that, I very much doubt we’d still be talking about that movie 46 years later. This is a narrow 5.5/10. It has some merit, but basically one to skip.
The Watchers (Known as “The Watched” in UK/Ireland) is a mystery horror written and directed by Ishana Shyamalan, the daughter of M.Night Shyamalan. This is her feature debut. The movie stars Dakota Fanning as “Mina” who is stranded in a strange Forrest when her car breaks down on an unfamiliar road. She follows a woman named “Madeline”(Olwen Fouéré) who hurries her into a nearby bunker like building she calls “The Coop”. Inside she meets two other strangers Ciara (Georgina Campbell) and Daniel (Oliver Finnegan). Madeline explains that it is impossible to escape the forest and that every night they must return to the coop where they are observed by mysterious and menacing beings. Mina is determined to find a way out and to find out who or what is observing them.
Chip Off The Old Block
The Watchers is another film with an interesting premise that falls short on delivery. It’s interesting to see how much Ishana Shyamalan takes after her father. Like most of his films, the movie throws out a mystery right at the start. Then it gives you the expectation for twists, challenging you to figure them out. Like many of M.Night’s films, those reveals underwhelm and/or are predictable. That’s not to say the Shyamalan formula can’t work, but the success rate is low. Like her father, Ishana seems technically competent and has a good eye for visuals. The problem for this story is that the main twist is particularly predictable and the characters are especially stupid. On the positive side it lands a similar running time to most of M.Night’s work at around an hour and forty and keeps a relatively quick pace.
It’s interesting to note that there is one notable change between the movie and it’s source novel. I can’t reveal that without hitting spoilers but effectively the big reveal of who the watchers are is totally different. The strange thing is from what I can tell (I’ve only read reviews/synopsis of the novel) very little else is changed. But then I recall M.Night did something similar with Old. I don’t think the change improved the story but to be honest neither twist seems especially good. As far as the smaller twists go though, that is far too predictable. The movie runs into a lot of the pitfalls of the science fiction trope strangers trapped in a location. Why does it take the protagonist turning up for anyone to figure anything out? Why do people blindly trust the person that was there the longest?
Conclusion
I had to laugh early when after running around trying to escape for half the day, the protagonist is show the “Point of no return” markers. These are the furthest you can go and have time to return before dark. But heading there part way through the day and then having a conversation at the location make it pretty clear you could definitely go beyond that and still make it back. Especially if you ran instead of casually walked. It made no sense, but no one questioned the bad logic. That sort of sums up the film really. It does have something going for it though as far as the atmosphere is concerned and the fast pace means it isn’t boring. I am going to write this one down as a reasonable start for a first time director, but ultimately not a recommendation. 5/10
Shortly after I was born, the world was introduced to the ultimate devil child. Not me though, this was 1976 and June (November in the UK) of that year saw the release of one of Richard Donners masterpieces of cinema, “The Omen”. A movie that terrified me as a child (Not sure how old I was when I saw it, but far too young to be watching). The movie expanded to a trilogy (In 1978 and 1981) that told the entire story of the antichrist. The final part was the weakest but did take the story to it’s logical conclusion. This was followed by an ill advised fourth movie in 1991 that was universally panned and a disastrous remake no one asked for in 2006. After an even longer hiatus the franchise finally returned in 2024 for another ill advised entry. This time a prequel.
The First Omen is directed by Arkasha Stevenson in her feature length debut, based on a story by Ben Jacoby. Stevenson, Tim Smith and Keith Thomas provide the screenplay. All relatively new but not totally inexperienced talent. Nell Tiger Free (Servant, Game of Thrones) plays the protagonist “Margaret”, a novitiate awaiting to take her vows. She is sent to an orphanage to finish her training but is caught up in a series of unexplained events and disturbing visions while there. A priest, “Father Brenan” (Ralph Ineson), explains to her that something nefarious is going on here and that the fate of the world may be at stake. However not even Brenan fully realizes the entire truth of the situation.
The Devil’s Greatest trick
Okay, so the first thing that comes across to me with this film is that it is really, really, boring. Not much of anything actually happens throughout the entire film and the plot twists are so easily guessed that there is very little pay off. The entire story of the Omen has run it’s course, a prequel was always an ill advised concept, especially since it was effectively done to absolute perfection decades ago with Roman Polanski’s “Rosemary’s Baby”. Not technically of the same franchise, but the best telling of the antichrists birth you are likely to see on screen. If the idea behind a prequel was to avoid comparisons to the original they failed as with this the movie will be compared to both The Omen and Rosemary’s Baby.
But this isn’t the only problem. like many demon/devil related horrors of recent years the makers have tried to steer the story into a somewhat anti-Christian frame and this is something that always works against the impact of this kind of horror. Demonic possession and the rise of the antichrist are Christian fears first and foremost and as such work best when the Christian element is leaned into instead of shun. This is the very reason why I felt “Nefarious” worked so well. That film was as biased towards Christianity as films like this and the recent Exorcist sequel are against it, but the simple fact is being biased towards it makes the film work! If you don’t want to lean into that, don’t make demon/devil films! H.P. Lovecraft is always a viable alternative as are Pagan deities or aliens.
Final Judgement
Tonally they did try and make the film at least feel like an Omen movie. In practice though, that mostly meant playing heavily discordant choral music over scenes of… well, not much at all. There were some references to events of The Omen but these didn’t serve that much purpose on their own. Mostly the film tries to create an uneasy atmosphere through the music and occasional unrelated visuals instead of from the plot itself. That plot involves a twist that is so painfully obvious that the swerve is really more irritating than anything else. This is no Angel Heart. The plot here has very little wriggle room due to the constraints of the other entries in the franchise and where they have found room for originality the directions are all disappointing.
Ultimately this is a confused offering. Politically speaking it is a very right wing franchise (Given the Christian element) taken in a very left wing direction. Which means the fears it tries to reflect are left wing fears, specifically female body autonomy and the danger of Christian fundamentalism. That couldn’t contrast more with the originals very Christian fear of the rise of the antichrist. As bad a fit as that is, my main issue with the film remains that it was just boring! This is a 4.5/10. Go and watch Rosemary’s Baby or the original Omen instead of this.
Is there any director more all over the place in quality than M. Night Shyamalan? Most of his movies are divisive with the audience, rejected by most but loved by a solid number. Some of his movies are universally panned and some are universally loved. It could be argued that he is doing exactly what a director should do (When making original content). Taking big risks and following his inner muse. However, his work always follows a certain formula, namely the big twist. As a result, he has all the hallmarks of both a good and bad director. Auteur’s do tend to have their own unique style. But when that style makes the stories predictable it does more harm than good. In many ways Shyamalan is his own worst enemy, because technically speaking at least he is a good director.
Here he has a conceptually interesting story. John Hartnett stars as “Cooper”. A family man taking his daughter, Riley (Ariel Donoghue) to a concert by “Lady Raven” (played by M. Night’s daughter, Saleka Shyamalan). Cooper though has a dark secret (Revealed in the trailer and early in the movie, so not a spoiler), he’s a notorious serial killer known as “The Butcher”. It turns out the FBI was aware he would be at the show (Though they don’t know who he is or what he looks like) and have the venue locked down. Having caught on to this it is down to Cooper to find a way out, preferably without ruining his daughters big day. He is being hunted by FBI profiler “Dr. Josephine Grant” (Hayley Mills).
Two Sides of Night
This is very much a film of two halves and it is the first half which is by far the superior. The interesting thing is this first half is entirely free from Shyamalan style twists. Sure the concept itself is somewhat of a subversion, but you find out very early that Cooper is the butcher and his attempts to escape the trap plays to M.Night’s actual strengths as a director. Scenes play out with a tension underneath where the audience understands the stakes but most of the characters on screen do not. This is classic Hitchcock style tension and Shyamalan pulls it off well. The pacing is pretty solid too leaving you on the edge of your seat. The problem is there is only really enough content here for half a movie. Horror films don’t need to be long, but all too often these days we see a horror with a cool concept that just can’t sustain itself for even 90 minutes. These ideas are better off as anthology shorts.
The second half of the movie is where we see the bad side of Shyamalan. Where the obsession with twists and subversions actually leads to the film becoming clankly and predictable. Here we see Cooper constantly outsmarted by almost everyone he comes across. He loses all ability to inspire fear and with the mask now off he turns out to be far less interesting as an antagonist/protagonist. In some ways it reminds me of the 2018 Halloween sequel since you effectively have three “Final Girls”, from three different generations taking down the villain. The difference is that none of these three are really main characters. Lady Raven comes closest but she doesn’t take a central role until the second half of the film and leaves the story a fair while before the climax. The result is a complete disconnect between the audience and these characters. It’s also a noteworthy horror for the total lack of deaths during the film.
Conclusion
This is a difficult film to rate. This represents the best and the worst of the M. Night Shyamalan. The first 40 minutes are very solid and would probably have garnered a strong 6.5/10 from me. The rest of the film though is disappointing and probably would have landed a 5/10 if I was feeling generous. I’m going to balance those out to a 5.5/10. Ultimately this is not entirely bad and you won’t regret watching. However, it’s not worth going out of your way for it and it certainly won’t be bothering your physical media collection (If you have one). Slightly above average, but with the good weighted so heavily towards the early half you will likely walk away with a bad taste in your mouth. I don’t really recommend it, but if it’s on streaming and you have nothing else you want to watch, go for it.
It’s been a while since I’ve reviewed a superhero movie. The truth is most of them aren’t that interesting to me these days. However, this team up is too appealing to resist. If the box office is any indication, I’m not alone in feeling that. This is a truly unique situation for a movie. It’s not just along overdue team up (We don’t talk about “X-Men Origins:Wolverine”). It’s also the first time Deadpool, regular breaker of the fourth wall has been able to directly reference the MCU. Last but not least it is more than nostalgia it is the farewell to the Fox X-Men universe. Truly, the end of an era. Effectively this is the “End Game” of the the Fox Superhero franchises.
Spoiler Free
This installment of the Deadpool franchise is directed by “Free Guy” (2021) director Shawn Levy. Writing credits go to Levy, Reynolds, Rhett Reese, Paul Warnick and Zeb Wells. Ryan Reynolds obviously returns as Deadpool and is joined by Hugh Jackman as Wolverine. Emma Corrin and Matthew MacFayden play the movies main antagonists (“Cassandra Nova” and Mr. Paradox” respectively). The rest of the cast will remain unnamed by me since that is basically spoilers (Don’t look at imdb btw, they are listed). Before I give you the basics, it’s important to know this is a spoiler free review. However, I will reference the material in the trailer, so if you have been avoiding even watching that you may want to skip to the conlusion.
I will keep the plot summary minimal. Effectively Deadpools universe is going to collapse due to the death of it’s “Anchor”. Being the universe of the Fox X-Men it’s no surprise that the anchor is none other than Wolverine. Don’t think to hard about an entire universe revolving around one single person from Earth, it is what it is! Deadpool is recruited by the Time Variance Authority and offered a new life in a certain other universe (Yes, the MCU). However, he would prefer to try and fix his own world. To do that he needs to find a new Wolverine. From here on things get complicated and spoiler filled, so that is all you are getting from me on the plot!
The Fox Multiverse
The movie features a lot of cameos, some of which actually turn into substantial supporting characters (At least for the middle act). If you have seen the trailer you know of two of these cameos, X-23 (From “Logan”) and Sabretooth. X23 is one of the characters with a more substantial role and it’s good to see the character grown up. Alongside her though there are three more characters that get a bit of a story arc and one more big (If short) cameo. On the villain side there are several cameos but most are blink-and-you’ll-miss-it affairs. The selection for all of these are well balanced and will give some surprises while providing at least one long overdue return of a fan favourite.
In some ways the use of the multiverse for these characters is similar to how it was used in Spider-Man: No Way home. It actually provides somewhat of a redemption arc for characters and actors that were not given the best of send offs or really even given a chance. But it’s important to note, these characters are mostly limited to the middle act. The first and final act still make use of the multiverse but in very different ways. But while this is all fun and creative the film never loses sight of what is important: Deadpool and Wolverine. This is their journey. Of course this is a Deadpool film first and foremost and that means Deadpool style humour and fourth wall breaking, but Wolverine fits into that world almost perfectly.
The Good, The Bad and The Other Stuff
So what about the weaknesses? Well, the plot never really feels that important. Perhaps because it is approached in a such a meta way or because the multiverse removes all stakes anyway. The movies two antagonists are okay and Emma Corrin does a great job as Cassandra Nova but their motivations for the entire film effectively feel like they just need to make the plot happen. It’s like they didn’t want a plot to get too in the way of the comedy. That’s fine but it is still the movies weakness. The TVA (As revealed in the trailer) are basically just here to initiate events and in many ways feel like an unwelcome interloper into a movie that is very much about the Fox Marvel films. It’s not a major issue though as they don’t dwell too heavily on any of the MCU elements.
The best thing about the movie is that it is fun! Of course it’s a Deadpool movie and you know what to expect. Outrageous comedy, meta comedy and outrageous meta comedy. The movie dives head first into the last of those right at the start. They found a remarkable way to simultaneously respect and disrespect the ending “Logan” (2017). This, they managed in a way that I think most people will be okay with it. Many watching will have no idea who the cameos are and won’t get a lot of the references. The humour though, should all still land. That is important because technically to get the most out of this movie you need to have seen every Fox and Disney Marvel movie, but if you haven’t seen a single one of them you should still have fun.
Conclusion
So what does the future hold now for Deadpool, Wolverine and the MCU? Impossible to tell. This movie has a lot in common with Spider-Man: No Way Home. That movie firmly remained an outlier for the MCU. The wrong lessons were learned and Marvel ultimately dived blindly into the multiverse to the point where everything seemed unimportant. Outside of that the MCU stuck to the plan that Kevin Feige had laid out before the Fox acquisition with extreme tunnel vision. This movie should show them that those Fox characters are still well loved. Ignoring them is leaving money on the table. That said, they need to have their own take on these characters. I don’t envy anyone stepping into High Jackman’s shoes.
The MCU is a juggernaut of a franchise and course correction takes a long time. We will have to see if they can manage it while there is still an audience. Whatever fate has in store for the MCU, this movie is a success in every way that matters. It is a final emotional farewell to the Fox era of superhero movies, a long overdue team up and highly entertaining movie in its own right. Oh and it’s also making bucket loads of money at the box office. This is a success and it’s a big recommendation from me. Is it the perfect movie? No, frankly the plot is paper thin and that limits the rating, but the movie is so much fun I’m still giving it one of my highest ratings 8/10.
The only movie franchise that can get away with having “Of the” in the title twice, returned once more this year with “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes”. The previous trilogy of films (Rise/Dawn/War) effectively told a complete story over the three films documenting how the world of Man could turn into the world of Ape. That story is over and to be honest was starting to get a little boring by the end. So, to come back to the franchise means finding something new. This is the test to see if there is any more to squeeze out of this franchise. A series that already sat at a total of nine films (this now being the tenth). One more film after this will see this reboot series equal the original in number. Quite a feat for a reboot. But anyway, is it any good? Let’s find out!
Building A Kingdom
Taking the directors chair for the franchise return is Wes Ball. Wes is only really known for the Maze Runner series, which was probably more miss than hit. However, Nintendo/Sony have enough faith in him to give him the tent pole “Legend of Zelda” movie. Josh Friedman (creator of “Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles”) provides the script. Owen Teague stars as the voice of “Noa”, and Freya Allan as lead human “Nova/Mae”. Support comes from Kevin Durand as his nemesis “Proximus”, Peter Macon as wise old Orangutan “Rakka” (A librarian of sorts, which has to be a Terry Pratchett reference) and William H. Macy as the only other human with a notable role, “Trevathan”.
The film is set an unspecified number of years after the reign of “Caesar” (the primary character of the previous trilogy) and depicts a world where humans are feral and rare and where most apes live in isolated villages with their own customs and cultures. Once such village is Noa’s which has a tradition of raising and working with Hawks. The apes here form an almost spiritual bond with the birds of prey. Noa’s village is attacked by local warlord Proximus Ceasar. Noa’s father is slain, the rest of the village are captured and Noa is left for dead. Waking up to find his home destroyed, Noa sets off to find and attempt to rescue his tribe. Along the way he teams up an Orangutan historian “Rakka” and an intelligent human they call “Nova”. She has her own reasons for finding Proxima’s base, a location that has many secrets of it’s own to reveal.
Echoes From The Past
I was pleasantly surprised by this movie. The previous two movies while relatively solid simply trod the same ground as “Rise”. That movie ultimately implied the completion of that journey and didn’t really need sequels to flesh it out. Those were movies more impressive visually than they were with their storytelling. I was hoping we would get something different here and we did. That said, the movie is very much a post apocalyptic adventure and hits many of the tropes you would expect from such a story, just with the twist of the world now being dominated by Apes. Proxima’s base could be straight out of a Mad Max movie or possibly a Fallout game. The Ape perspective though is interesting, when they find an observatory, Rakka sees murials depicting humans and concludes it was some kind of reserve that the apes homed the humans in.
One potential negative is the deliberately vague passage of time. At some points it seems like centuries have passed, but the surviving intelligent humans act like they actually remember the old world and their goals and places they inhabit don’t quite fit with it being centuries after the fall of man. This can be explained a little by humans having about twice the lifespan of most apes. So twice as many generations of ape will pass in the time of one human generation. Also while these apes can talk, they appear to not be able to read, making it more difficult to pass on information between generations. Still, there are a lot of questions that remain. Future entries may prove this to be an interesting bit of world building instead of a flaw, time will tell.
Evolution Of The Franchise
Visually the movie is a big winner. It looks great and the action scenes involving the apes are impressive. The film takes a journey through a great variety of locations and provides some action in each. Each environment looks unique and provides something new for those action scenes. That said, many of these set pieces are only unique within this movie, not the action genre in general, so there is nothing ground breaking but it is definitely entertaining. But it’s not just the action, the characters all have somewhat of an emotional journey and their own agency and goals. The movie is longer than I would like at 2 hours and 25 minutes, but it doesn’t drag. While there are elements that could have been cut, there wasn’t anything I felt needed to be left on the cutting floor.
This is a good, fun movie. Not terrible original and definitely not ground breaking (Ten movies in, no surprise). However, compared to the last trilogy it changes things up enough to not be boring. The story feels like one worth telling and while I’m not sure how much more life the franchise has in it in general, I would like to see more of this branch of the story. That said, the movies largest flaw is it is predictable and that is largely the franchise at this point. There are only so many times you can push the “Apes used to be kept in zoos” reveal. At some point this reboot series needs to break away from setting up the events of the 1968 original and answer the final question: Can humans and apes actually live in peace? This is a strong 6.5/10 and a recommendation.
This month I’m doing a speed run. I’ve got four movies and two documentaries for you. It’s a lot to cover so I am giving each two paragraphs only. I’ll have more content for you in July including some major reviews. For now though, I’m looking at four low budget horror movies: “Project Dorothy”, “Sting”, “I Saw the TV Glow” and “Arcadian”. Don’t worry, I’ll still have plenty of horrors to review in October! As strange bedfellows to those I’m looking at a pair of documentaries, namely “Brats” and “Jim Henson: Idea Man”. Let’s get started!
Sting
Sting is a tale of an alien Spider creature that is briefly befriended by a young girl (Called “Charlotte”, naturally), but then goes on a rampage in an apartment block, slaughtering the residents. It’s also about the relationship of that girl with her Step-Father who she both idolizes and resents. Jermaine Fowler, Ryan Corr and Alyla Browne star. The movie is the brainchild of writer/director Kiah Roache-Turner, the man behind cult classics Wyrmwood (2014) and Nekrotronic (2018). This is a simple horror movie that had a lot of promise… But doesn’t quite live up to that. Very much a case of: Close, but no cigar.
The movie begins with a clever little scene and leads into a stylish intro. Roach-Turner is pretty good at adding a little class to a generic horror, so no surprise here. The rest of Sting however plays through largely by the numbers, though competently and with some charm. It has an interesting concept that ultimately has no impact on the rest of the story, which devolves to a straight forward monster in a building affair. The cast is decent, the characters are reasonable and the monster doesn’t look terrible. But outside the intro nothing really stands out. This hits a strong 5.5/10. Not quite enough to be a recommendation, but if you have nothing better to watch and like horror, it’ll do.
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Rating: 5.5 out of 10.
Arcadian
I often say you can’t go too far wrong with Nicholas Cage these days. When he wants to he can bring it as an actor, but mostly he just seems to be doing things that are fun and many of his more B-Movie releases in recent years have become instant cult classics. This is an actor that is just having fun with his career in his later years and long may it continue. Here though he has a smaller role with his character Paul’s sons taking center stage. It works though and the two actors, Jarden Martell (As “Joseph”) and Maxwell Jenkins (As “Thomas”) do a solid job. Benjamin Brewer (Who directed Cage previously in 2016’s “The Truth”) helms the film. Mike Nilon provides the script. Nilon is mostly a producer (And has worked with Cage several times previously), this is only his second writing credit.
The film doesn’t waste much time with explanations. Indeed the creators of this seem to have quite deliberately left things a mystery. Mostly I think this was a good idea, but it does mean the movie just sort of throws things at you. The monsters are actually pretty cool, decently scary and original looking. The move well and seem to have a lot of lore behind them that the film barely touches on. That said, we’ve seen all this before. Arcadian is similar to any number of Monsters-Take-Over-The-World films and we know what to expect from them. The result is a film without any real originality but well made and relatively compelling. If you’ve never seen “The Quiet Place” or the horror/comedy “Love And Monsters” watch those instead. But if those movies are your thing, you’ll enjoy this too. This is a 6/10 and a recommendation.
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Rating: 6 out of 10.
Brats
Way back in the 1980’s and early 1990’s I was aware of the term “Brat Pack” and that it applied to a group of young actors that were making waves in Hollywood. It was never entirely clear who was in this pack, but I liked their movies and that was all there was to it for me. For those actors however this was a whole different matter. The term came from an article by David Blum, originally an interview with Emilio Estevez, but Blum changed the article to talk more broadly about that entire generation of actors. Those actors reacted badly to this label and in many ways have carried around resentment about the label throughout their careers. Now one of those actors, film maker Andrew McCarthy has decided to meet up with the rest of the gang to look back on that article and how it impacted them.
This is a mildly interesting documentary mixed with a chunk of 80’s nostalgia. Primarily this is a documentary about Andrew McCarthy and how he felt about the article that labelled him and many of his peers “Brats”. We see a bit of how others felt and a small amount of talk about the impact of the movies themselves. If you grew up watching these actors you will get something out of it, but ultimately the question of how they felt about being labelled as the “Brat Pack” didn’t need an entire documentary to cover and while their reactions are interesting they are about what you would have expected. Where they cover the movies it becomes a bit more interesting but that aspect is almost an afterthought. If you didn’t grow up in the 80’s this likely won’t be of interest to you. For me, an 80’s kid, it just about hits a 6/10.
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Rating: 6 out of 10.
I Saw The TV Glow
This is a small cast surreal horror from Jane Schoenbrun centered around “Owen” (Ian Foreman/Justice Smith) and his total obsession with a TV show which may be more than it seems. The focus on a single character with almost no personality and the very slow build makes this really drag until that halfway point, at which stage the message gets confused. It is a very obvious allegory and while it never names the topic, it wears it on its sleeve. Despite that, the creators clearly wanted to be artistic with it and for me the most interesting thing was to see the conflict between their desire to push a specific message and the artistic need of leaving things to the viewer to interpret.
That’s not to say all art has to be open to interpretation but the truth is if you want to deal with a really specific issue and the message is more important than being creative you should probably stick to drama. Genre entertainment works better with broader messages that can resonate with everyone no matter how they interpret it. From about half way through up until the ending this seemed more of an allegory for drug abuse and the impact of media on young minds. Only with the very on the nose ending was I certain my original read of the message was correct. At which point I realized the film may not be saying what the director thinks it is. While that is interesting, the film itself is not. Despite a little bit of style and flair this is a 4.5/10.
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Rating: 4.5 out of 10.
Project Dorothy
A very low budget B-Movie horror that attempts to make the most of it’s limited resources but is ultimately too bland and with too many plot holes to be any kind of cult classic. The movie is from relatively new director George Henry Horton and starts Tim DeZarn and Adam Burdon as a pair of thieves hiding out from police in an apparently abandoned warehouse after stealing a valuable piece of technology. The warehouse though houses a psychotic AI from the 1980’s that is looking for a way to escape her confines. The AI, named “Dorothy” is played by horror scream queen Daniel Harris (“Jamie” from Halloween IV and V), who takes top billing despite having the smallest role of the three.
Major plot holes surround the main premise, from not thinking there was an internet in the 1980’s, to not understanding how WiFi dongles work and of course the idea that an extremely dangerous AI would be cut off from the world by an easily broken padlock and no other security. This would be fine if this was a horror comedy, but unfortunately it takes itself a little too seriously. It’s also lacking in style, there’s no cool imagery or clever scenes that stand out here. The two main characters do a reasonable job, especially given how little they have to work with. The AI mostly chases after them with fork lift trucks and turns the lights on and off. There’s definitely been more terrifying and more interesting AI’s. Still, the movie isn’t boring, it is however below average. 4.5/10
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Rating: 4.5 out of 10.
Jim Henson: Idea Man
How doesn’t love the Muppets? Come to think of it, what 80’s kid doesn’t love The Dark Crystal or Labyrinth? Jim Henson is a cultural legend for sure, with a great positive influence on the world of entertainment. Despite dying relatively young at 53, he was a giant for two decades and his legacy still stands. Indeed the Muppet’s still occasionally make movies (2014’s “Most Wanted” being the most recent), Sesame Street is still running and Dark Crystal had a TV series relatively recently. A ill advised sequel to Labyrinth is apparently in the works too, without Henson or Bowie. None of these things would happen if there wasn’t still a lot of love for Jim’s work.
This documentary covers Jim’s entire career and gives a solid amount of time to each stage, providing something of interest not matter what era of Henson’s career is of most interest to you. The Focus though is on the man himself and the documentary has a real personal feel to it, through the interviews with all those close to the man and their thoughts, inter-cut with interviews with Jim from over the years. There is nothing ground breaking here, but it is a very moving tribute to a truly creative man. We see his struggles, his relationship with his wife and kids and how he impacted everyone he worked with. The documentary makes it hard not to feel a lot of affection for this driven, funny human being. This is a 7/10.
This month we’ve got a bit of a mixed bag to sort through. We have one horror film in “Abigail“, previously known as “Abducting Abigail” (As listed in my January preview for this year); We have an over the top action comedy in “Boy Kills World“; and the most indie of indie movies, the story of a family of Sasquatches “Sasquatch Sunset“. No clangers this week, but two that didn’t quite land for me. Although only one of these ended up a recommendation, all these movies have positives and something to offer someone. Let’s dig in!
Sasquatch Sunset
This is a film that didn’t entirely work for me, but I can see where some may find it appealing. It treads the ground between artistic vision and gross out comedy. In my view it relies a too heavily on the latter, making it hard to enjoy the former. If I’ve learned anything about these fictional creatures it is that they are basically just grosser versions of humans. This is in some ways endearing and in others… Well, just unpleasant. This is the Sasquatch cycle of life. We witness mating, death and birth. In between we seem aggression, we see tenderness, anger, fear at the unknown, curiosity and uh, body excretions.
Despite featuring very emotional scenes, I struggled to feel empathy for these creatures. This all felt very mundane to me. Part of the problem is that the heavy makeup makes it difficult for the actors to emote. As Sasquatches of course they don’t speak either and instead just grunt. They compensate for this with a lot of body acting and it works to some degree. But I didn’t feel especially connected. Fun fact: One of the Sasquatches is actually Jesse Eisenberg. Of course he is unrecognizable and doesn’t talk, so you’d be forgiven for missing that.
Cryptid Writing
When you have cast that will struggle to emote, you really need the music to do the heavy lifting. However, instead the soundtrack is understated and ethereal with a dream like quality. To be fair, I actually liked the soundtrack quite a lot, but it didn’t drive the story emotionally. It’s possible it was intentional to give the film a dream like quality, these are mythical “Cryptids” after all. The soundtrack release for the movie actually contains a cover of one of the actual songs from the film, but with the lyrics replaced by grunting. Really, that sort of summarizes the features art meets silliness approach!
Conceptually this is interesting and it is why I watched the film in the first place. I was especially interested in the lack of dialogue (I’m a big fan of the series “Primal”). What I wasn’t aware of was how much the movie would rely so much on body excretions to entertain. That isn’t my thing, but if you like an artistic concept paired with gross out humour this may be for you. What I will say is the Sasquatches did look great. Visually the film worked really well and this was made for around $1m, so that is in itself very impressive. For me though on entertainment value it is a 5.5/10.
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Rating: 5.5 out of 10.
Abigail
Abigail tells the story of a group of criminals that have been given a high paying job abducting a young girl. They don’t know who her father is outside of them being wealthy. However, it turns out things are not as they seem and one by one they are being eliminated while they await news of the ransom. It turns out it really does matter who you kidnap. The movie comes from Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett and stars Melissa Barrera, Dan Stevens and Alisha Weir. SPOILERS for this one. Suffice to say this is a visually entertaining movie but full of cliches and heavily reliant on all the characters being stupid. If you still want to stay unspoiled, skip to the last paragraph.
The film gave away the nature of Abigail both in the trailer and many early synopsis’s. Hell, I knew she was a monster late on in 2023 back when this film was still going to be called “Abducting Abigail”. Child Vampires are not new and the movie even references Anne Rice, so I guess little Claudia was the inspiration here. She is done reasonably well and definitely the movies highlight. The visuals are in the “Fun horror” category where things are pushed to such extremes as to be sort of funny (Lots of “Red mist”). While the visuals are fun, I can’t help but find a lot of similarities between this movie and “Ready or Not” by the same directors. But that movie had something this does not: Characters.
Red Mist
Every character here is a hollow shell and everyone other than the final girl is mind-numbingly stupid. Joey (Said final girl), could not be more of a cliché. Her single flaw is that she is a recovering drug addict. She recently got clean. As a result is incredibly competent, a master of hand to hand combat, able to read every person she meets instantly and figure out their back story and is afraid of nothing. Yep, sounds like the kind of recovering drug addict who would be in on a kidnapping scheme…. Of the rest of the team only a couple even verge on competence, but ultimately fall short. Even with Joey, the group collectively make repeated dumb mistakes (Such as constantly splitting up).
Ultimately, this by-the-numbers horror features barely outlined characters who need to make constant stupid decisions to drive the story forward. It has some decent cinematography, generic but fun effects and reasonable pacing. If you want a popcorn horror it may suffice but it is a long way from “Ready or Not”, which was this directing duos one good movie. Most recently they made two bad scream sequels. This is better than those but not by much and I’m starting to realize how much “Ready or Not” relied on the talents of Samara Weaving to make it work. Unfortunately Melissa Barrera (Who was also in those bad Scream sequels) is not quite good enough to prop up a movie by herself. Anyway this is a 5/10.
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Rating: 5 out of 10.
Boy Kills World
For the final movie is this months review roundup we have the directorial debut of Moritz Mohr with “Boy Kills World”. The movie is written by Mohr, Tyler Burton Smith and Arend Remmers and stars Bill Skarsgård as the unnamed “Boy”. Bill is playing a deaf mute here though, but his character has a constant voice over representing the voice in his head and H. Jon Benjamin (Bob’s Burgers/Archer) provides that voice over. The rest of the cast split fairly evenly in their supporting roles, but Famke Janssen stands out as the film’s big bad, “Hilda Van Der Koy.” This is a martial arts revenge film set in a dystopian future, but played out very much as an action comedy.
“Boy”, grew up in a Dystopian city ruled over by the brutal authority of the Van Der Koy family. The family has an annual tradition of rounding up 12 dissidents and executing them on live TV in an event dubbed “The Culling”. As a child, the Van Der Koy’s killed his mother and the families matriarch Hilda Van Der Koy personally shot his sister in front of him. Boy himself was to be executed via hanging, but was rescued by a mysterious Shaman (Yayan Ruhian). Since then the stranger has trained the deaf and mute child to be the ultimate fighting machine and given him a single task: To kill Hilda Van Der Koy. The child though never got to experience growing up naturally and so despite his skills maintains a certain childishness to him. He also is haunted by visions of his dead sister. Eventually though he must take on the evil family on the night of “The Culling”.
Smart But Stupid
This is a movie that I expected to be fun both for outrageous action and a bit of comedy. That was really all I expected and yet it managed to pleasantly surprise me. The story is both darker and more interesting than I first imagined and provided a solid twist towards the end that turns the entire story on it’s head. Meanwhile, I did indeed gain a lot of entertainment from the action and comedy. Most of that comedy (That landed with me anyway) was down to the deaf protagonist not being able to read the lips of one character properly, which ended up not just providing a few quick (Hilarious) laughs but actually became a pivotal part of the story. This is a clever film packaged as a dumb movie and it does both parts extremely well.
I don’t have a lot of criticism for this one. One issue is the film focuses so much on the protagonists’ point of view that we don’t really get to know the other characters well. This also means the world building is somewhat minimal. To be fair some of this is because the film relies heavily on mystery. You know this is some kind of dystopian future but not much more than that. While this is a flaw, it doesn’t really harm the film that much so it’s not a big one. We don’t spend much time with the supporting cast, but they are all without exception larger than life and feel straight out of a comic book. This means they are at least memorable. We learn everything we need to know about them, but nothing more. The over-the-top video game style voice-over may put some people off. However you will find a lot of entertainment value if you can get past that. This movie does just about enough to earn a 7/10 for me. Definitely recommended.
Guy Ritchie has been on fire in recent years. Releasing “The Gentlemen” in 2019 just as the pandemic was hitting, the movie could have sunk without a trace but instead became a cult classic. It was successful enough to warrant a TV show spin off (Which came out earlier this year). Last year Guy Ritchie released two movies that between them showcased both the serious and the fun sides of his repertoire. Those were the outrageously fun “Operation Fortune” and the intensely serious “The Covenant”. I highly recommend both films. This year Guy Ritchie is aiming firmly at the middle ground with his take on the WW2 covert mission “Operation Postmaster”.
Before we start, one quick moan. Guy Ritchie is an English director and the movie stars Henry Cavill, another Englishman. It is a thoroughly British story about British heroes told by a director that couldn’t be more British in his style if he tried. Yet, everyone in America got the opportunity to see this in the cinema before me. Over here it didn’t even get a cinematic release! This happened with last years releases too and is down to a deal with Amazon. For me that is a real let down. We have a great legacy of movie making in the UK and we should be showcasing our finest talents in our cinemas. Anyway, let’s look at the film shall we?
Churchill’s Secret Warriors
The movie is based on the novel “Churchill’s Secret Warriors: The Explosive True Story of the Special Forces Desperadoes of WWII”. Fortunately Ritchie found an easier to digest title for his film which takes one key section of that book and expands it to feature length, ramping up the action and adding in his own brand of humour. There is also somewhat of a switch on the lead character. The book’s protagonist was Danish war hero Anders Lassen, played here by Alan Ritchson (Star of the TV show “Reacher”). However the movie is very much an ensemble piece and positions Gus March-Phillipps, a founder of the Small Scale Raiding Force, a precursor to the SBS (Special Boat Squadron) as the primary lead. Gus is played by Henry Cavill. The switch makes sense for this story and Lassen actually gets the best action scenes, so no harm done.
There are some historical inaccuracies with some of these characters and of course liberties in how events transpire but nothing out of the ordinary or that gets in the way of the entertainment. I recommend looking up the historical events and characters for yourself after as they are all fascinating. The movie tells the story of the events of “Operation Postmaster”, a covert mission during WW2 to turn the tables on the Nazi U-Boat fleet by robbing them of their supplies. The problem was this involved taking military action in neutral Spanish territory and so had to be done covertly and off the books. This requires an elite team of unconventional thinkers, assembled for the task by career rogue Gus March-Phillipps. Along the way they will need to rescue one of their own from the Gestapo.
The High Stakes of War
This is a fun movie, but not without a flaws. My main issue here is something of a trend in modern action films of never really feeling like the heroes are in genuine danger. Sometimes this is easy to shrug off, such as with The Equalizer III or The Beekeeper. However, I feel a war movie really does need to feel like death is not just a possibility but a likely outcome. It’s worth noting that the novel follows Lassen right up to his heroic death in “Operation Roast”. That would have made for a very different movie and one with more of an emotional impact. Perhaps though, it would have been less fun. Still, I can’t help but feel this should have felt more than a stroll in the park for the heroes.
The movie repeats a few of it’s beats, notably the opening is scene is somewhat replicated towards the end (But no spoilers on how). The primary antagonist of the film, indeed all the antagonists are pretty ineffective. The film tells us they are evil scary people, but we don’t really see much of this on screen. This is not so much of an issue if you go in expecting a heist movie, because that is what it really is. That is firmly in Guy Ritchies wheelhouse. So this is the director doing what he does best, it just has the background of being during WW2. The important thing is that the movie is entertaining.
Heroes
The action is fast paced and exciting. The heroic characters are colourful and each one gets their own moment. Alan Ritchson in particular has some of the most intense action scenes, which confused me a little until I found out his character is the lead of the novel. Indeed he was a true real life bad-ass. Lasson died heroically at the age of 24 after serving his country for six years and is the only Non-Commonwealth recipient of the Victoria Cross during WW2. Cavill still gets to be a cool action hero however. Cool being the key as his calmness under pressure is his defining characteristic. Gus March-Phillipps, is known to be one of Ian Fleming’s inspirations for James Bond (Though not as the film suggests, the main one).
The rest of the cast perform their parts nicely and no one feels superfluous. They all bring charisma to their roles and the heroic historic characters are compelling. It is perhaps a little lacking in Guy Ritchie banter we tend to expect from his movies and the villains are a bit too one dimensional, but overall it is solid fun. This is a fast paced action film and you’ll barely notice the 2 hour run time. Well worth your time. 6.5/10
Godzilla X Kong: The New Empire, is the fifth movie in Legendary’s “Monsterverse” film series (Which also includes the “Monarch” TV series on Apple). Adam Wingard who helmed the previous “Godzilla Vs Kong” movie returns to the directors chair. Terry Rossio returns to write the film and is joined by Simon Barrett. This movie also sees the return of a few of the human characters (And their actors) from last entry. Specifically Rebecca Hall as Ilene Andrews, Kaylee Hottle as Jia and Brian Tyree Henry as Bernie Hayes.
The Fun End Of The Spectrum
This is quite a change from the last Godzilla movie to hit our screens, the phenomenal “Godzilla Minus One”, but that doesn’t mean it will be bad. This series provides a (Somewhat) heroic Godzilla who stands as the Earth’s guardian against other monster threats (Though still destroys the occasional building). Kong meanwhile now lives in the “Hollow Earth”, where the Monsters come from. This is an arrangement that seems to suit both titans. At least until a new threat emerges. This is very much on the popcorn/fun end of the monster movie spectrum.
That threat is discovered by Kong as he travels the Hollow Earth and comes across beings much like himself, including a child. Things take a twist though when they attack him. What he discovers is that these beings are ruled over by a malevolent ape who has harnessed the powers of a mighty titan to destroy his enemies and make his people cower before him in fear. His intention appears to be to come to the surface and bring forth a new ice age. But it will take more than just Kong to stop, perhaps more than Kong and Godzilla.
Learning From The Past
The big mistake of the previous Godzilla Vs Kong movie was in including two separate groups of humans, one for each titan. More often than not, the humans just get in the way of these kinds of stories, so it’s best not to overuse them. The exception being Godzilla Minus One, but that was an exceptional movie. In Godzilla Vs Kong, “Team Zilla” really felt like they didn’t need to be there and the film dragged when they were on screen. Here they reduce the team down to one Kong focused team and that helps with both pacing and consistency. Though that’s not to say they were a highlight, but they don’t get in the way. I’ll speak about them a bit later.
The real star of the movie though is King Kong. Godzilla is still the king of the Monsters and there is no real disputing that in the movie, but Kong is a far more versatile character capable of expressing emotion (To some degree) and able to provide a greater variety of action scenes. Focusing more on Kong is beneficial to both Monsters as Godzilla needs to maintain some mystery while Kong benefits from being a little humanized. The makers of the movie clearly understood this and bringing in other Ape beings (Especially the child Ape) gave Kong an emotional journey. There is also a welcome return of another heroic titan (No spoiler, but you can probably guess).
The Trouble With Humans
Pet peeve time! One thing I detest in movies is when a macho character tells everyone to be careful of the dangers and is instantly killed. This has been so overused that it is a cliché now and really needs to stop. It’s my second biggest pet peeve after the “Exposition Guy” (A character whose only purpose in a film is to give exposition). Anyway, we have a very minor character that seems to have just been there for that one scene. It’s seconds of the film and not a deal breaker, but because it doesn’t impact anything that makes the inclusion even worse. Stop doing this Hollywood!
My only other complaint with the movie would be that outside the main Mother/Daughter characters the remaining pair of humans are goofy and one dimensional. They are basically along for the ride and don’t have much in the way of agency. Honestly for a film like this though it’s not a big problem. Trying to give them more depth would have meant a longer run time or taking attention away from Kong and those would be larger mistakes. Bernie though has been in two of these movies now and felt pointless in both. Brian Tyree Henry is capable of more (See “Bullet Train” for example), but only if he is given something to work with.
Conclusion
Godzilla X Kong: A New Empire, provides a good pace (I didn’t really notice the run time) and solid action with a bit of humour along the way. It’s nothing ground breaking and it won’t bring you to tears. It’s simple, somewhat shallow but definitely entertaining. It is a rare case of a franchise learning from previous missteps and simply giving the audience what they want (In this case giant monsters beating each other up). I’ve got to give this a strong 6/10 (Almost a 6.5) and recommend it as a fun popcorn flick.
You must be logged in to post a comment.