Upcoming Movies in 2024 – Part 1 (January to June)

With the 2023 wrap up out of the way, it’s time to take a look at what movies are coming to our screens in 2024. I’m doing this in two halves, so this is just the first six months. It’s worth noting that several of the big names were actually due out in 2023 but got pushed back due to the various strikes. Dune: Part Two for example was a movie a lot of people were excited for in 2023, but it got pushed back, unnecessarily in my view, due to the strikes. Specifically they wanted the actors available to promote it. These days it’s debatable if the actors actually help or hinder a movies promotion given their tendency to make divisive comments in interviews. Then again, the last Dune movie didn’t perform that well despite meeting audience approval so I understand them not wanting to take the risk.

It’s also worth noting how few superhero movies are hitting the screens this coming year and neither the MCU nor DCU/DCEU have an official entry this year. The DCEU is dead now and James Gunn’s DCU doesn’t launch until 2025. Marvel meanwhile only have MCU adjacent content with their revival of the Fox X-Men universe via Deadpool 3 and three more entries in Sony’s more miss than hit “Venomverse”. This is probably for the best, given the disastrous box office both franchises have had in 2023. It remains to be seen if this little break will help the recent decline in the popularity of superhero movies or hasten it. Disney are putting out two MCU shows next year mind, but I doubt “Echo” or “Eyes of Wakanda” will help much.

First Quarter.

The first few months of 2024 offers several highly anticipated movies, several of which were originally slated for 2023. I’ll start off with a list and then break it down by month. Note, a lot of the movies I’m listing here aren’t big Hollywood Blockbusters. With the writers strike, the major studios took a big hit and as a result have less than normal to bring out. However, often the best movies aren’t from the major studios, so I’ve included a lot of smaller films I think have potential. Some of them aren’t even horrors!

Note: I’m updating this list with review scores as I watch stuff!

JANUARY
Night Swim – January 5th (Horror)
The Bricklayer – January 5th (Action/Thriller) – 4/10
Destroy all Neighbors – January 12th (Horror/Comedy) – 6/10
The Beekeeper – January 12th (Action/Thriller) – 6.5/10
Self Reliance – January 12th (Comedy) – 6/10
I.S.S. – January 19th (Thriller/Drama/Sci-Fi)
Wanted Man – January 19th (Action/Thriller) – 5/10

FEBRUARY
Lisa Frankenstein – February 9 (Horror/Comedy)
Argylle – February 12 (Action/Thriller)
Madame Web – February 14 (Superhero)
Land of Bad – February 16 (Action/War)
Drive Away Dolls – February 23rd (Thriller/black comedy)

MARCH
The Fall Guy – March 1 (Action/Comedy)
Dune: Part Two – March 5 (Sci-Fi)
Imaginary – March 8 (Horror)
NEW ADDITION: Roadhouse – March 8 (Action)
Damsel – March 8 (Fantasy)
Kung Fu Panda 4 – March 29 (Family/Comedy)
Mickey 17 – March 29 (Sci-Fi)
Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire – March 29 (Fantasy/Comedy)

January.

First up is the Blumhouse horror Night Swim (Which will be already out by the time I post this), this is a movie that was originally due out in 2023 but got postponed. The movie itself looks so so, but it does mark the new partnership between James Wan and Jason Blum who merged their companies on January 2nd this year. This will create a real powerhouse for horror in the coming years especially considering their partnership with Universal. Later in the month Jason Statham’s launches us firmly into 2024 in solid style with the fun looking action movie “The Beekeeper“. It’s classic Jason Statham, if you hate those movies you can probably skip it but if you enjoy them you can expect to be in safe hands.

There’s quite a few lower profile movies for January too that look interesting. Those after low budget horror fun though should check out the trailer for “Destroy all Neighbors“, which looks like “Psycho Goreman” levels of fun with more than a hint of Alex Winter’s “Freaked” (And not just because Winter is in this too). Another interesting one for January is the comedy “Self Reliance” which looks to subvert “Hunting Humans/Running Man” trope. This has been done a few times now (For example the excellent “Guns Akimbo”), but the trailer looked fun and they seem to have found a new angle to it.

Finishing up the line up is a couple of action films in “The Bricklayer” and “Wanted Man” and the science fiction triller “I.S.S.”. The Bricklayer (Which is already out), looks pretty good from the trailer and is from seasoned action director Renny Harlin (Cliffhanger, Die Hard II, Long Kiss goodnight). Wanted Man is directed by and starring Dolph Lundgren. Dolph has directed a few action films now and all hover between 5-6/10 on imdb, so don’t expect too much. I.S.S. meanwhile is a sci-fi/thriller based on the idea of what would happen on the International Space Station should nuclear war between Russia and the US kick off on Earth.

February.

February sees our first Superhero film for 2023 and…. yeah, it doesn’t look good. “Madame Web” appears to be Sony scrapping the very bottom of the barrel of the characters they have available. Traditionally Madame Web is an elderly blind woman in a wheelchair that helps guide Peter Parker. I’ve never been a big fan of creating a “Spider-Family” when one of the things that made Peter Parker Spider-Man was having to solve his issues by himself. Madame Web at least was always very hands off, effectively just a quest giver. But it’s still just a gimmick hanger on character and not the kind you would make a movie for. This character is joined by three more Spider-Knockoffs, the only one I care about at all is Julia Carpenter, since she debuted it “Secret Wars” back in the 80’s, when I was heavily reading Marvel Comics.

On a potentially positive note we finally get the Henry Cavill spy thriller “Argylle“, though a word of caution on that one: I’m pretty sure that is a bait and switch. The trailer only shows Cavill playing an in world, fictional version of the character and as the trailer reaches the point of introducing the “Real” Argylle…. it ends. Yeah, it’s totally not going to be Henry. My guess is that the author of the fictional in world books that is central to the story is the real Argylle, in what would effectively turn the story into a “Long Kiss Goodnight” remake. This may or may not cause a backlash depending on if the movie is actually any good! Fortunately the trailer did look action packed and fun, so regardless of who the real Argylle is, it may be entertaining.

Filling out the rest of February are some real wild cards. Probably the most notable is Ethan Coen’s “Drive Away Dolls“. The trailer looked stylish but I honestly couldn’t tell much else about it. Then there’s the action movie “Land of Bad“, which looks like a typical soldiers in action type movie but those can sometimes be very good, so we’ll see. Finally, there is another comedy horror, “Lisa Frankenstein“, the plot is somewhat similar in basic concept to horror cult classic “May”, but with the comedy dial turned up to eleven. Lisa, like may is trying to construct her perfect man, but this time she starts with a re-animated corpse and is basically trying to replace bits of it to make it less… dead. Not sure if it will work in practice, but concepts like this are always a fine line between hilarious and terrible.

March.

March is where things really get interesting in 2024, with a number of highly anticipated movies. This includes the delayed “Dune Part II” finishing off Denis Villeneuve’s adaptation of Frank Herbert’s first Dune novel. The trailer for this looks superb and it may be the safest bet of the year for quality. The month also sees a fourth Kung Fu Panda movie, but more interesting for me is “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire“, the fourth canonical Ghostbusters movie and direct sequel to “Afterlife”. The movie sees the franchise return to New York and there is more than a chill in the air. The remaining OG-Busters return once more, though it is unknown how large their roles are this time. My guess is you won’t see much of Venkman in this.

We also get a reboot of “The Fall Guy“, an 80’s TV series now turned into a movie. There seems to be little in common between this movie and the series, but the trailer did look pretty good. Perhaps this will be the new “Equalizer”. A potential movie to look out for in March is Bong Joon-ho’s science fiction adaptation “Mickey 17“. I don’t know the source material (The novel “Mickey7”), but the synopsis sounds interesting and this is an Oscar winning director with a strong list of science fiction and horror movies to his name. The very capable Robert Pattinson takes the lead roll in the movie, so there is a lot of potential. Capping off March is a pair of trope subersions with Netflix’s take on the fairy tale movie “Damsel” and the imaginary friends gone bad horror “Imaginary”. The latter of those is the first of two movies about imaginary friends this year.

Second Quarter.

The second quarter of 2024 features a run of big budget action based movies and a fair amount of horror along with a lot of franchise returns. In all (Of the movies listed), nine are either franchise sequels, prequels, spin-offs or reboots and only six are original films, four of which are horrors. Here’s the list:

April
NEW ADDITION: Monkey Man (Action) – April 5th
Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire – April 12 (Action/Kaiju)
The First Omen – April 12 (Horror)
Abducting Abigail – April 19 (Horror)
NEW ADDITION: The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare – April 19th (Action)
Civil War – April 26 (Action/Thriller)

May
Horrorscope – May 10 (Horror)
If – May 17 (Horror
Furiosa – May 24, 2024
Garfield – May 24, 2024
Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes – May 24, 2024

June
The Watchers – June 7, 2024 (Horror)
Ballerina – June 7
Bad Boys 4 – Jun 14
Inside Out 2 – June 14, 2024
A Quiet Place: Day One – June 28
Horizon: An American Saga (Pt 1) – June 28

April

Already controversial film “Civil War” hit’s theatres April 26th. Hard not to feel that movie is cynically cashing in on extreme tensions across the US in what is sure to be the most controversial election of all time. Fortunately even in the trailer they make it clear the film is pure fantasy since it has California teaming up with Texas! April also gives us a new entry in the “Monsterverse” franchise, “Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire” this time it’s a full on Godzilla and King Kong team up movie and it remains to be seen if they can actually make this work. Certainly the scene of Godzilla running in the trailer was… strange. After the success of the Japanese Godzilla Minus One in 2023, it’s uncertain whether the audiences are still on board with a heroic running Godzilla teaming up with a heroic Kong.

For horror we have an ill advised old franchise prequel “The First Omen“, which just to be a little more confusing is a prequel to the reboot Omen film from 2006 and not the one from 1976. yes they made a prequel to the film that has a 5.5 (62k votes) on imdb rather than the one with a 7.5 (129k votes). Go figure. Though a prequel to the ’76 film would basically just be Rosemary’s baby. All feels a bit pointless to me, but maybe it’ll be a surprise hit. April also sees the release of Universal monster thriller “Abducting Abigail“, a movie little seems to be known about, but seems to be about people kidnapping someone that is actually a monster.

UPDATE: Two new movies have been added to the slate in April that are worth mentioning, both are action films. First is “Monkey Man” from Universal, released April 5th and from the looks of the excellent trailer is a action film/superhero origin movie. That is followed by Guy Ritchies latest movie “The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare” with Henry Cavill. Ritchies output last year was nothing short of spectacular so I expect good things here as well. It seems April just got kicked up a notch!

May

May brings more questionable sequels with the first Mad Max film without Mad Max in: “Furiosa“. It’s also the first Max franchise movie to feature extremely heavy CGI and it was very noticeable in the trailer (And not in a good way). One sequel that actually looks decent though is “Kingdom of the Planet of the Ape“. Honestly it could go either way, but the trailer was promising. May also brings “The Strangers: Chapter 1“, a prequel to a home invasion film I wasn’t particularly impressed with. In my review of “The Strangers” the only positive I had about it was a surprisingly good performance by Liv Tyler. Another horror out in May is the deliberately misspelled “Horrorscope” about people having their fortunes read and then dying in related ways to that fortune. Straight forward gimmick; we’ll see how it lands.

May sees Garfield back on the big screen, now with Chris Pratt voicing the lasagna loving feline. The new film is called “The Garfield Movie” not to be confused with “Garfield: The Movie” from 2004. June also features a potentially big animated feature with “Inside Out 2“, though Disney doesn’t have the best track record with animation in recent years, so remains to be seen if it will be as much of a success as the original film. Disney can’t claim genre fatigue on their animation since everyone else seems to be doing well in that department. One movie that I think may be a hit this year (One of two for Ryan Reynolds), is “IF“, this years second movie about imaginary friends. These are good imaginary friends though, so don’t expect them to murder anyone. This is pure fantasy/comedy and the trailer looked great.

June

As we roll into the summer we get a pair of franchise action movies with the fourth installment of Michael Bay’s Bad Boys franchise “Bad Boys 4“. Not much is known about that one right now, so there is a chance it’ll get delayed. Before that though we get “Ballerina” a John Wick spin off set between the third and fourth movie of that franchise. The movie does include Keanu Reeves reprising his role, but the actual lead is Ana de Armas. It’s unknown how much of a role Wick will have in it. The third movie vying to be an early summer hit is Pixar’s “Inside Out 2“. While the original was a big hit, we all know how things are going for Disney right now and this isn’t Toy Story. It seems unlike “Anxiety” will be as popular a character as “Joy” was.

On the horror side of things June brings “The Watchers“, the directorial debut of Ishana Shyamalan, M. Night’s daughter. Hopefully she isn’t also obsessed with building movies around a single twist. The big horror movie of June though is the Quiet Place prequel “A Quiet Place: Day One“. If you read my review of the previous movie you’ll know I really liked the prequel section and was indifferent to the rest, so I’m actually on board with this one. Stepping away from horror, the final movie of note in June is Kevin Costner’s latest Western Epic “Horizon: An American Saga“. This is a self funded two part movie with the second due out in august. The total run time is apparently eleven hours, though it was originally meant to be four movies and seems to now be just two. The final length remains to be seen… But probably not by me!

End of Part One

Part two launches right into the summer holiday season and beyond. Right now its pretty barren terrain thanks to last years writers strike. They delayed a lot of films due out last year to make sure they had some content, but that could only stretch it so far. Also the end half of the year is where films are more likely to be delayed again, so it is a lot more speculative. Suffice to say part two will be shorter! Anyway, thanks for reading and I hope it’s given you a few films to look forward to.


The 2023 Box Office Breakdown

When looking at the box office, in past years I’ve used a more accurate spreadsheet that takes into account the slight variation in percentage of ticket sales that goes to the studio for the opening week and global territories. This year however I’m just using the simple 3 X production budget formula. What that effectively does is assume the marketing costs are about 50% of the production budget again and that the ticket percentage is a flat 50%. The actual figure is far more complicated. I’ve split this years films into Epic Wins, Success, Met Expectations, Disappointments and outright bombs. Let’s start at the top!

Epic Wins of 2023!

This is a relatively short list. The biggest winner of the year is “Barbie“. A movie that most expected to do well, but literally no one expected to cross $1.4 billion. There’s a lot that could be said about the movie, it certainly isn’t perfect but it does seem to have truly resonated with fans of the franchise. Regardless of if they agreed with the treatment of the Ken’s, the real world or the crude humour, they also recognised that this really looked like Barbie’s world. Barbie wasn’t the only franchise though to give it’s fans something that felt right and the second biggest winner of the year is again way out in front of the rest of the gang this year and that is “The Super Mario Bros. Movie“. Another film most expected to do well. My particular prediction was it would do “Minions numbers”, but it blasted even past that to a whopping $1.36 billion globally. I feel there is a lesson to be learned here about, but I’ll get to that later.

After these two phenomenons things get a little more subjective. Here we need to look at which movies massively exceeded all expectations rather than the gross ticket sales. The first such hit is unsurprisingly Oppenheimer. In what was probably the strangest viral marketing tactic of any movie people were encouraged to go an see “Barbenheimer”, a double bill of Barbie and Oppenheimer. Bizarrely this was embraced by audiences and both movies saw a considerable boom in ticket sales. The two movies couldn’t possibly be more different, but it’s an important lesson in never underestimating the power of a good meme. Is it something we’ll ever see again? Well Barbie is almost certainly getting a sequel and Christopher Nolan isn’t going to stop making movies any time soon, so who knows?

Two more movies to land in the epic win category are “The Sound of Freedom” and “Godzilla Minus One“, both with low budgets and both massively over performing. On top of that the audience response was off the charts. The Sound of Freedom is an emotional thriller from Angel Studios made for $14.5m, originally meant to be distributed by Fox, but after the company was purchased by Disney the movie remained on the shelf until Angel Studios requested out of the deal and found alternative distribution. Disney screwed themselves out of a good bit of money on that one, but they are full of bad decisions these days. Godzilla Minus One meanwhile is a Japanese Godzilla film made for a mere $12m and looking every bit as good as a $200m Hollywood blockbuster. The film takes Godzilla right back to his roots and is widely considered the best Godzilla film since the 1954 original.

Success Stories of 2023

At the higher end of the production budget scale there isn’t a lot of success stories for 2023 (Outside those epic wins). It’s pretty much just the animated Spider-Verse film “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse“, largely coasting off the great reception the previous Spider-Verse received back in 2018 as well as the continuing strength of the Spider-Man brand. Fan reactions to this one were mixed, with a few of the character portrayals not quite landing with viewers and the ending feeling anti-climactic. Turns out this was only half of a story and the continuation is already delayed thanks to the writers strike. However, the animation continues to receive praise and the Spider-brand remains the one guaranteed cash cow in the Superhero genre.

The most successful horror movie of the year was the video game adaptation “Five Nights at Freddy’s“. With a $20m production budget, perhaps on the higher side for horror the move raked in $300m globally, The thing to note here is that was with a day and date streaming release. That means no one actually had to go to the theatres to watch this legally but they chose to anyway. That is a huge success and honestly could have pushed this one to the epic win column. The movie itself was very true to the game and absolutely nailed the look of the animatronic monsters. That said it wasn’t without flaws, most notably how light the horror elements actually were. As a result the reaction to the movie was decidedly mixed, but the important thing was fans of the game loved it.

Not too far off the success of FNAF was an early release in 2023 the horror film “M3GAN“. A personal favourite of mine from the year, the film drew in $181m worldwide against a production budget of only $12m, making around $145m. That’s a considerable amount of profit and you can bank on this film seeing a lot of sequels in the coming years. The latest entry in the Saw franchise “Saw X” made itself a healthy profit with $109m against it’s $13m production budget. That’s a $147m profit and you can bet Saw XI won’t be too far off. Surprisingly, the sequel no one asked for “The Nun 2” managed to earn itself $268m against it’s $38.5m budget, netting $152m in profit.

Talk To Me” had a production budget of just $4.5m and raked in $70m, with many calling it the horror film on the year. The latest Insidious sequel meanwhile, “Insidious: The Red Door“, had a $16m production budget and raked in $186m globally. Despite it’s financial success though, The Red Door was not well received and it remains to be seen how much life this franchise has left. Last but not least The Evil Dead series had it’s second reboot with “Evil Dead Rises” drawing in $146m against it’s $19m budget. That’s a profit of about $89m. though it’s worth noting when the production budget is under $30m the P&A cost (Mostly marketing) is likely more than 50% of the production budget so these films possibly made a bit less than I am listing, but they still did well.

Business As Usual – Meeting Expectations

I’m not going to cover too many lower budget movies here as it’s quite hard to judge what expectations are for a lot of those. Many of those films will be of more value on streaming after their theatrical run or are more about studio prestige than actual profits. But there are still a few films to talk about. First up, the most successful live action superhero film of the year “Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol 3“. This was the final part of the James Gunn’s Guardians story and his final Marvel movie before heading over to DC and Warner. With that in mind, expectations for this film were high and because of that it could be debated this is actually a disappointment.

Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol 3 is the fourth highest earner at the box office with a worldwide haul of $845m. The problem is the production budget of $250m pushes the break even point to about $750m, meaning the movie likely didn’t even bring home $100m of profit. On top of that it brought in less (Inflation adjusted) than the previous GOTG movie and represents a creative dead end for the MCU. That said, outside of the depiction of Adam Warlock the film was well received and made for a strong send off to the team and James Gunn.

Also rounding off a well love movie series was “John Wick: Chapter 4” and in doing so achieving about what would have been expected. The movie drew in $430m against a production budget of $100m. Despite the lower numbers it likely ended with a greater profit than GOTG3 and kept in line approximately with the previous movies. The reception from audiences were positive, despite a few noting how over the top it has all become now and how John Wick is basically a superhero at this point. The choreography and camerawork in the action scenes though was pretty spectacular. While the movie ended John’s story, it opened up the world in which is was set to any number of spin offs, so the franchise is still alive and strong.

Doing about what was expected in the box office was “Creed III“, the now Stallone-less Rocky spin off franchise pulled in a franchise best box office of $275m, but against a production budget of $75m (Also a franchise high), giving it profit of only around $50m. Fan reaction for this one was down on the previous two movies and it is doubtful we’ll see as many of these films as we did from Rocky. Still, no one will be too upset with this performance. Last on this list is “Scream VI” pulling in $168m against a $35m budget and with mixed reception from fans, it’s not lighting the world on fire but for the sixth entry in a horror franchise that should probably not have had sequels at all it’s not a bad showing.

The Disappointments of 2023

Obviously flops and bombs are also disappointments but we’ll deal with those separately. First film on the list is the latest out, “The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes“. This is a movie that seems to have landed precisely at it’s break even point of $300m against it’s $100m production budget. No one will be celebrating that, but at least it hasn’t lost money. The tepid box office about reflects the audience and critical responses for the movie. If ever there was a movie that could be described as “Mid” it is this one.

Next up we have “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem“, a movie that sort of farted onto the cinema coasting off general franchise popularity and then heading into the sunset with a haul of $180m against it’s surprisingly high $70m production budget. The theoretical break even point for that is around $210m meaning this probably made a loss of a round $30m. It’s close enough to the break even point that it may have cleared it’s costs, but it could also be a lot more. That ambiguity is why it is in the disappointment section instead of outright flops, but it’s safe to say no one will be happy with this. Seth Rogen continues to be franchise poison.

Next up on the disappoint list is a director for who the word “Disappointment” has become somewhat synonymous with his career. Shyamalan M Night is a capable director that occasionally just makes very bad decisions. His movies tend to revolve around twists and that is always going to leave a lot of viewers disappointed if that twist just doesn’t resonate with them. The movie in question here is “Knock at the Cabin“, Drawing in about $54m global against it’s $20m production budget. Again technically under it’s break even point, but close enough that only the studio and their accountants likely know if it is in the black or in the red.

The last movie on this list to avoid being full on flops or bombs is somewhat debatable and that is Pixar’s “Elemental“. Going just on it’s theatrical performance of $486m against a $200m production budget it would be in definite flop territory. However, it has done very well on streaming and perhaps enough to remain out of Bob Iger’s nightmares this year. After all he has a lot more to be concerned about. The movie is pretty generic pixar stuff, but there’s been far worse animated movies out this year. No one is going to celebrate this one, but it could definitely be worse.

A few movies came out this year and flopped but avoided going “Full bomb”. First is Neil Blomkamp’s “Gran Turismo: Based on a True Story“, pulling in $117m against it’s $60m production budget and losing about $60m. This will certainly not help Blomkamp, which is a shame because he is a very talented director that should be the one making those big franchise movies. “A Haunting in Venice“, the third Kenneth Branagh Poirot movie had a $60m production budget, but drew in only $114m, losing about $66m. These last two I’m told are good movies, but am yet to see them. Last on the list is Trolls Band Together” drawing $139m against it’s $95m budget and losing about $45m.

In the genre of Horror an interesting one is “The Exorcist: Believer“, which technically did okay $136m against it’s $30m production budget. But Blumhouse paid out $400m for the rights to the franchise, meaning that they likely expected more from the film. If future movies do about the same, scraping out under $50m in profit, the franchise won’t actually have made any money until it’s ninth installment (Which would technically be Exorcist 10,12 or 13 depending how you count it). That definitely isn’t what they had in mind when they purchased it.

BOMBS AWAY!

This is where most of the big budget movies of 2023 ended up, so since I’d like people to actually read this article I’m not going to be verbose on this one and just plow through it. First up “is “. Next on the bomb list. “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves“, a movie I found disappointing but one not without support, it drew in $207m against it’s $150m production budget, losing around $200m for Paramount. Second on this list is Disney’s controversial live action remake of “The Little Mermaid“, which generated $568m globally. An impressive haul, except that with a production budget of $250m it’s break even was a whopping $750m, meaning the movie actually lost $182m for Disney.

Big franchises were no guarantee of success in 2023. “Transformers: Rise of the Beasts” drew in $438m globally against it’s $195m production budget, losing around $147m for Paramount. It’s worth noting on this one, domestically the last three Transformers movies have made about the same, but the international numbers have been plummeting movie after movie, going from $555m to $391m to just $280m. Also Bumblebee had a more modest $118m production budget putting it’s break even point at $354m, had Rise of the Beasts been as careful with it’s spending it would have made $84m instead of turning into a bomb. However, there is no denying internationally Transformers may have run it’s course.

One of the years more surprising failures is “Mission: Impossible Dead Reckoning part one“, a movie that drew in a whopping $566m globally, yet still ending up losing $300m due to it’s insane $290m. The lesson there should be obvious, but I would add that I don’t feel audiences are too keep on going to see what they perceive as half a movie either. In practice the movie did have a conclusion but seeing “Part One” in the title probably put some people off. The movie also had unexpected competition from surprise “The Sound of Freedom”. Joining in the insane budget club is “Fast X” with an astronomical budget of $340m, meaning it needed to make over a billion to break even. It made $714m, loosing $306m.

Disney attempted to turn an amusement park ride into a successful movie franchise again this year with Haunted Mansion. The movie cost $158m, had a break even of $474m and generated just $115m. That’s a whopping $359m. If that is embarrassing it’s not as embarrassing as their centenary celebration movie “Wish”, whose nonsensical plot managed to pull in only $146m against it’s $200m (that they admitted to) budget. That means the movie lost Disney $454m, probably not how they planned to celebrate. It’s worth noting last year I was optimistic about Wish since it was supposed to be a return to classic hand drawn animation. However, that plan was abandoned and they reverted to rather poor looking CGI instead. The plot apparently was changed too and I Can’t imagine for the better.

But as bad as all that looks….Well, then their is “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny“. Another movie with a $300m production budget (bang on $300m supposedly, which likely means it was a lot higher but that’s all they’ll admit to). Indie 4 drew in a mere $381m worldwide losing Disney $519m. That is half a billion lost digging up a long dead franchise that already had two send decent send offs (I’m talking just of the end of “Crystal Skull” there, not the entire movie). It could be argued most of the damage was done with Crystal Skull or that the trust in Lucasfilm after it’s horrendous mismanagement of Star Wars is so low it didn’t matter what they put out, it was doomed from the start. Then again word of mouth wasn’t good either. Technically this was the biggest box office bomb of all time, at least for a few months….

Superhero movies were, with a couple of exceptions, box office poison this year and with Marvel and DC dominating the genre that means Disney and Warner Bros took a big hit. Disney’s “Ant Man & The Wasp: Quantumania” only brought in $463m globally against it’s $200m production budget, losing $187m for the company. But if that sounds bad, it was a huge success compared to some of the other movies in the genre this year. DC’s “Blue Beetle” could only manage a minuscule $128m against it’s fortunately more sensible budget of $120m. That means a loss of $232m for Warner on that one. The Shazam Sequel “Shazam! Fury of the Gods” is in a similar situation earning $132m globally against it’s $125m budget, losing Warner $243m. It’s worth noting had Quantumania cost $120/125m, it would would have broken even. Warner’s due meanwhile would have had to be produced for $40m to break even, but then let’s remember Godzilla Minus One cost $12m, so these things are possible.

So, as bad as those losses were they are nothing compared to the this years true super villains, “The Flash“, Aquaman: The Lost Kingdom” and “The Marvels“. It’s worth noting the Aquaman sequel is still out in theatres, though after the first full week and the first few days of the second we can make a pretty reasonable prediction. Least disastrous of the bunch is theoretically “The Flash”, but a lot depends on if you believe the official production budget of $200m. This film had a *lot* of reshoots. But even going by the official it’s break even would have been $600m and it only managed a paltry $266m. That means at best The Flash lost Warner $334m. Between this bomb and his personal issues it’s fairly safe to say Ezra Miller’s career may be over.

Speaking of people with no Hollywood career anymore, Amber Heard’s controversial legal feud with Johnny Depp may well have cost Aquaman II a good portion of it’s box office, but in a year where every DC movie has bombed it’s unlikely to be just that. The first Aquaman movie reached the billion mark, this one has barely scrapped $145m and going by it’s current legs will probably finish somewhere around $188m. The movies official budget was $205m and again this movie had a lot of reshoots. At one time Michael Keaton’s Batman was in it, at another Ben Afflecks, but the final released version contains neither. Going by their numbers it needed $615m to break even and will likely end with a loss of around $334m (Yes, the same as The Flash). Add it all up and Warner’s DC brand has cost them $1.14 billion this year. Ouch!

Remember when I said Indiana Jones was the biggest box office bomb of all time… for a few months. Well, that was until “The Marvels” came out. The movie probably winning the award for dumbest name of the year (Marvels The Marvels? Really?) and demonstrating that perhaps requiring the global audience to need to watch a load of Disney+ TV shows to have an entry point on a movie is not the best plan. It also suggests that perhaps Marvels D and E list characters just aren’t popular enough to lead a movie, at least not without the hype of an impending “End Game”. I’m not exaggerating about the character tiers either, Captain Marvel was always D-List and Kamala Khan is E list at best (Though Iman Vellani could have raised her up in better circumstances).

The movie’s official production budget was $275m making it’s break even a whopping $825m. How much did it make? $199m global. That’s a crippling $626m loss. That’s over $100m than Indiana Jones loses. I’m reminded of that time Kathleen Kennedy posted a “Passing of the Lightsaber” to Kevin Feige for breaking the $2b point with Infinity War (After The Force Awakens had previously hit that mark). How times have changed. Now if they were to pass that lightsaber around it would probably be to commit harakiri… except these days being stabbed through the guts with a lightsaber is something you can walk off, so maybe not.

Since I charted Warner’s superhero loses, it’s only fair I do that for Marvel too. Thanks to the small gains of GOTG3 that figure is around $715m in loses. While that may make Marvel seem healthier than DC, at least Warner is able to do a full reboot. Plus Disney have to add those other loses from Lucasfilm and their animation wing into that pile and those sting. The final tally is a loss of $2.4 billion for Disney’s movies. So yeah, Warner got off light.

Conclusion

Appearances can be deceptive, when you look at a list of films with the highest box office for this year you will probably see a few of these disasters and perhaps be mislead into thinking they are successful, but the level of production budgets and marketing costs these days means those big Hollywood movies need to make an incredible amount of money just to break even. Meanwhile most horror films, dramas and independent movies need to make very little to be a success. Hollywood tends to favour the bigger budget movies though because when they are profitable they tend to be incredibly profitable. But it is always somewhat of a gamble. This year most of those gambles ended in disaster.

Indeed it’s probably safe to say this is the worst year in history for the box office. The problems though are pretty clear. First of all, there is no denying that superhero fatigue is a thing now. People may debate on if it’s just over-saturation or too many low quality movies, but the truth is both of those are symptoms of a genre trend reaching the end of it’s road. Superhero movies won’t disappear, just as westerns never disappeared or horror movies after the 80’s boom. Quite often the best movies in a genre come out after it hit’s decline (For example both “Unforgiven” and “Tombstone” came out long after the western was supposed to be dead).

Not that superhero movies were the only clangers this year. Disney movies were almost entirely bombs this year, with only GOTG3 bringing in some bacon for them. It’s notable James Gunn’s swansong at Marvel was probably Disney’s most universally accessible movie that year, the rest of their output tended to be on the divisive side and when your budgets are at $200m and higher you really can’t afford to turn any potential fans away. Elemental was probably their next most accessible movie and that ended up the most likely to claw back into profitability via streaming and physical media sales. There is a definite pattern there. It’s not to say you can’t make heavily progressive leaning movies, but you need to budget them appropriately. When you are talking about huge franchises, it would be seriously stupid to turn off half the audience.

But accessibility goes for the global audience too. It’s not just about left and right leaning English speakers, it’s about global cultures. If you have stories and themes that resonate with people no matter where they live or what their politics are, then that $1 billion + box office will be in reach. If your film only really appeals to the population of California, then you need to realize that it’s probably capping off around the $200m mark. That means you need a budget of around $60m or less if you hope to make a profit. It’s as simple as that. Even aside from being divisive a number of films this year have shown that you can make spectacular looking movies for much less than Hollywood has been spending. Outside of a James Cameron Avatar movie, I don’t see why any film should cost more than $120m for it’s production budget. If CGI is so expensive, stop relying in it!

On the positive side though, for me at least, there is a clear indication that Horror is a sensible way to go right now. The “Success” section of this article was almost entirely horror movies because you can make them cheaply and the audience is fiercely loyal, both for horror in general and for specific franchises. Personally I don’t feel we need an eleventh Saw movie or a Seventh Scream, but chances are the fans would turn out for them. The first Evil Dead movie came out in 1981 and yet the second reboot in a row is 42 years later is still able to make a solid buck. The Exorcist is a trickier one, but had they not spent so much for the rights that would be considered a success. Considering the film had terrible word of mouth and fell off a cliff in it’s second week, it did surprisingly solidly. Certainly “The Nun 2” had no business being a success and yet it made more profit than “Guardians of the Galaxy vol. 3”. Right now, horror films are the only safe bet that a studio can rely on and studios love a safe bet.

When I look at this years epic wins though one thing becomes really clear. The top end of the movie market isn’t really driven by the studios or the mainstream movie media anymore. They are driven by the fans and social media. Mario Brothers and Five Nights at Freddy’s cashed in on a very dedicated gamer fan base. Barbie and Openheimer meanwhile, while likely to be successful in their own right, made huge gains due to a simple meme. It’s worth noting too that Mario, Barbie and FNAF all gained praise from the most dedicated fans of those non-movie franchises. It seems once again giving the core fanbase what they want pays off. Sound of Freedom and Godzilla Minus One were never expected to be hits (At least not in the US), but word of mouth can have a huge impact. In this instance it seems the secret is just make something worth watching!

Anyway that’s all for now… Thankfully! A year like this gives me far too much to have to fit into one of these. It remains to be seen if Hollywood (And more specifically Disney) will learn anything from this. In previous decades Kevin Feige and Kathleen Kennedy would be out of a job for taking the mantle of worst bomb of all time, but we don’t live in those times anymore and some producers seem untouchable. That’s not a good situation for Hollywood, but as we’ve seen if they aren’t willing to give people the entertainment they want, they will find it elsewhere. Not necessarily in movies either, we’ve had a good 100+ years of cinema, it would be foolish to think future generations would be as passionate about these films as you or I. Happy New Year!

Bad CGI Gator (2023)

Yes, you read the title correctly. It’s time to dive into the world of modern B-Movie horror with this ridiculous horror comedy from Full Moon Features. If you know the name, you will know this is Charles Band’s company, so this is a studio (In one form or other) that have been making low budget horror (and some sci-fi) since the 70’s. They know how to get the most out of the budget and how to make movies quickly. That doesn’t make this movie sound any less silly of course! This feature is just under an hour in length and is directed by Danny Draven (Also taking composer duties) and penned by Zalman Band (Charlies son).

There is some controversy with this film. The makers of “Bad CGI Sharks”. Obviously they feel their idea was ripped off. It’s worth considering though gimmick shark movies aren’t exactly original either, so maybe it’s fair game maybe not. You can decide that one for yourself. There’s certainly no doubting they stole the “Bad CGI” idea, the only question is, does that matter? Personally I’m not sure, but I do know at this budget level there is a lot of band wagon jumping in general. Anyway, let’s get back to the Gator and see if it has any teeth!

A Reptile Dysfunction.

The synopsis for this one is short. It’s a 1 hour horror comedy B-movie, what did you expect? A group of friends (Well four friends, one sister and a guy dragged along apparently to set him up with the sister), head to a lakeside cabin for spring break. The nearby lake has an alligator living it, though the friends aren’t aware of this. One of the girls, a tik-tok “Influenced” wants to throw the groups college laptops into the lake for a video (Because “The college will just replace them”). After the stunt they return to their cabin, however the laptops electrocute the lakes alligator transforming it into…. Uh, BAD CGI GATOR! Yes, that happened.

It’s worth reminding you, this is meant to be a comedy, so don’t expect anything to make sense. Anyway, the now CGI Gator starts attacking the friends picking them off one at a time until only the sister “Hope” (Played by Madie Lane) and the non-friend “Sam” (Michael Bonini) remain. Sam and Hope are also quickly developing feelings for each other after Sam romantically stalked her instagram account. Between them they must find a way to escape from this gator, which by the way can also fly and after consuming a bluetooth speaker, grow in size because that’s how it works now.

Bad CGI.

Okay, so this is a ridiculous plot. But for a horror comedy it isn’t really a problem as long as the film is funny and fortunately this is. I laughed out loud several times and in a movie that is less than an hour in length that is a win. Honestly the film probably could do with being a little longer, especially as the ending is a little on the quick side. That said, something like this being too short is probably better than being too long. The effects are what you’d expect and despite the severed limbs I wouldn’t really describe it as “Gore”. Indeed the severed limbs are mostly used for comic effect and quite effectively. There’s also some nice ironic elements with the corpses, which I always approve of in horror films.

The bad CGI gator is of course bad CGI, which you would expect. One issue with this though is the quality of CGI is actually no worse than I’d expect in a low budget horror anyway and case in point, even before the alligator is transformed it is bad CGI. My criticism here is they probably could have made the transformed version a bit worse! It would have been a nice touch to have had it “clipping” into the scenery and stuff on occasion too. For example they could have had it unable to pursue people at some point because it’s tail has clipped into the ground and so it is stuck. Missed opportunity.

Spring Break.

The characters and acting is around about what you’d expect for a low budget B, but there are definitely three tiers to it. Effectively you have three couples (Though the lead pair aren’t a couple until the end) and each couple is about on par for acting talent. One pairing is notably bad, especially the girl’s dialogue delivery, but the movie helps us out here by making them the gators first victim. The next tier are actually in some ways the most fun characters in the film. Both characters are shallow college kid stereotypes, but the actors go all in on the roles and that really helps the comedy. When we are introduced to them I rolled my eyes, but since they provide most of the comedy it was almost a shame to see them killed off.

The final pair is our two leads, Sam and Hope. As actors Bonini and Lane are better than you would expect at this budget level and with the right breaks could probably go a lot further in their careers. It’s always worth remembering just how many big Hollywood stars started out in low budget horrors (Maybe not always this low, but sometimes). Demi Moore for example was in another Charlie Band produced movie “Parasite” from 1982. So they are worth keeping an eye on. Not that this was an Oscar level performance or anything, just better than I expected.

Conclusion.

So overall, this is actually a lot better than most people would expect a movie called “Bad CGI Gator” to be. The plot barely exists, there is bad acting and bad effects, but the movie is fun, funny and in it’s own B-Movie way, clever. Some of the acting is better than you’d expect at this level and some of the characters you’d expect to hate turn out to be the most entertaining. Overall, while it’s not going to get a high rating, when I put this on I figured I’d be lucky to get a 4/10 but instead it’s a high 5/10. Not the best, but higher than I’ve rated some Hollywood horror movies. If you love your B’s, you’ll get a kick out of it.

Rating: 5 out of 10.

Censor (2021)

Back in the 1980’s, every teenager and young adult in the UK knew the term “Video Nasty”. We were into a period of boom for the horror industry and specifically for low budget direct to video horror. Producers like Charles Band would be pumping out two horrors a year (One for theatres and one direct to video). Italians were actively making films for international audience and video stores paid very little attention to certifications (I know this first hand, I wasn’t 18 until 1994 and I watched it all in the 80’s). Unsurprisingly there was a moral backlash to this which got big media attention. As a result a number of movies got banned in the UK and even today those UK release VHS tapes are incredibly valuable. Because they were band obviously we deliberately sought them out. It became a point of pride to have watched a “Video Nasty”.

Anyway horror film Censorship became a big issue in the UK. Largely down to campaigner Mary Whitehouse and the MVLA. But there were those that realised this was a huge marketing boost for people peddling anything that pushes the boundaries. Whitehouse and friends became an unwitting marketing tool. The result was more such content got created and it fed back into the boom. So much for censorship huh? Anyway, the independent British movie “Censor” from 2021 plays off that entire scene. This is from upcoming writer/director Prano Bailey-Bond and appears to be based off a short film she made a few years earlier called “Nasty” (At least the synopsis sounds really similar). It stars Niamh Algar (Raised by Wolves).

The Mary Whitehouse Experience

Enid (Algar) is a film censor that takes her job very seriously. She wants to protect people, and this stems from some childhood trauma where her sister disappeared, presumably being abducted. No one ever solved the case. While her parents have taken the move to have her declared legally dead, Enid is unwilling to move on. After being shaken up by having one of the movies she approved accused of inspiring a real life murderer she is asked to look at a film from a particular notorious movie director. In the film one of the actresses looks really familiar to her and she starts to wonder if this is her missing sister.

This sets Enid off on a mission to find out about the director and see this woman for herself. She starts to believe her sister is in genuine peril from these people and it’s down to her to save her. But is everything what it appears to be? Has a career doing nothing but watching the most violent of movies for the greater good damaged her? Eventually she finds her way to the movie set where they are recording the sequel to the film she saw earlier. Mistaken for an actress she is thrust right into the center of the action.

Video Nasties

The biggest problem with Censor stems from it being a feature length extension of a 15 minute short. This is something I’ve noticed a lot in similar films. The truth is what it takes to come up with a cool 15 minute horror isn’t necessarily enough for a feature length movie. Despite not being especially long, Censor really feels like it doesn’t have much to say. We have the basic idea of the video nasties and a damaged mind unable to separate reality from fiction and… that’s it. That’s the movie. You can tell this is a story that could have just as effectively been told over 15 minutes. It’s a problem with a lot of modern horrors. Writer/Directors go in with one good idea and just try and stretch that out.

As far as the sort-of tribute to video nasties goes, it’s a little shallow. There were some aspects of it I appreciated, such as how Enid’s rampage is shown to us in a similar fashion to the movies she was watching earlier. But this isn’t a clever meta film like Scream was to slashers. It uses the British backlash and censorship of these movies as a backdrop but doesn’t really go much deeper. There are is a sort of minor plot thread involving a murder that is thought to have been inspired by a video nasty that Enid had cleared, but that is somewhat detached from the main plot. Eventually it transpires the killer never even saw the film. Of course Enid has seen all those films, so it’s left unclear where the film stands on the topic. Indeed, it feels like the film doesn’t really care to examine it that closely.

VHS Nostalgia

I do appreciate that they went to the effort to make the film itself look like it was filmed in the 80’s and that part of the production is well done. The flickering of what looks like bad VHS tapes done for atmospheric and stylistic reasons and work well in both regards. This isn’t the most original concept and 80’s nostalgia is the most cliched nostalgia, but for me it’s a positive. That aside the film doesn’t really provide much in the way of memorable visuals and perhaps it could have done with making some visual references to more famous 80’s horrors. The soundtrack is pretty forgettable too and feels like a missed opportunity. A “Goblin” or Fabio Frizzi style soundtrack could have really elevated this movie.

There are some things I liked about the movie, mostly in the final act. Although the twist is obvious in coming, I liked the way it is presented. Really this sequence is the highlight of the movie and remains good right up to the credits. I also liked the ending of the scene where Enid accidentally kills the horror producer. The scene itself was nothing special and missed a lot of opportunities to demonstrate Enid’s bad mental state, but her polite exit after the incident was a good way to show her shattered mind. That is basically the signal point for the final act which is in all very solid. The trouble is the first two acts to get there are not at all interesting or compelling. Niamh Algar however puts in a very impressive performance as Enid and that certainly helps elevate that finale act.

Eject

This is a conceptually good, but mostly below average horror with a strong final act that narrowly falls short of redeeming the movie. The trouble is while the concept is interesting, far too little is done with it. Ultimately the entire film is just designed to get us to the ending and little interesting or worthwhile is provided along the way. It would however have made a great Creepshow episode. It’s not a complete waste of time though and British fans of 80’s horror will likely enjoy the references to some extent. Censor falls just short of “Good” and levels off slightly above average at 5.5/10

Rating: 5.5 out of 10.

Smile (2022)

Just because October is over, doesn’t mean I’ve stopped watching and reviewing horror movies. This particular one I originally planned as part of my October Challenge, but I swapped it out for “Five Nights At Freddy’s” at the last minute. So this is somewhat late review of “Smile” from 2022.

Newcomer Parker Finn writes and directs the movie and it stars Kevin Bacon’s daughter Sosie Bacon in her horror movie debut. Bacon is not a complete stranger to horror however, having appeared in the “Scream” TV series for four episodes. The main support is from Jessie T. Usher and Kyle Gallner. Smile had a tremendously successful marketing campaign which mostly involved the stars standing around at public events with insane grins. It went on to gross $217m worldwide, which for a movie costing only $17m to make (and probably more than that in P&A) represents a huge profit. But is it any good?

I’m Not Crazy!

Sosie Bacon plays “Rose Cotter” an overworked but driven therapist at a psychiatric ward. Rose is largely driven in this career by the impact of witnessing her mother’s suicide when she was young. Having been too afraid of her mentally ill mother to assist her, she blames herself for her death. One day she asked to speak to a new patient called Laura (Played by Caitlin Stasey). Laura is thought to be suffering extreme trauma After witnessing her college professors suicide. She claims she isn’t insane and is instead being tormented by some kind of monstrous entity. The thing would appear to her in the form of various people, all of whom would be grinning. After freaking out in the interview, Laura takes on this same manic grin and cuts her own throat.

Rose is shaken by the incident and soon she starts seeing this entity herself. After realizing there is more to this then just trauma Rose begins to investigate. Looking into both her patient and the professor she finds a long chain of suicides. Convinced now that this curse is real she desperately tries to find a way out of it. Her friends and family however don’t believe her, largely because they wonder if she has inherited her mother’s mental illness. Her ex boyfriend however, police detective “Joel” (Gallner) attempts to help her dig into this mystery. They discover there was a break to the chain of suicides and Rose wonders if this may give her a way out. But will it be that simple?

Behind The Smile.

So first thing to talk about here is the crazy grin. This isn’t the first film to make use of the unsettling nature of an exaggerated grin. The first use was likely “The Man Who Laughs” from 1928, famously the inspiration for The Joker. It’s also worth noting a famous “Creepypasta” known as “The smiling Man” also features this and may well be the inspiration for the film. Not too many years before this Blumhouse released the movie “Truth or Dare” (2018), which also heavily pushed the gimmick. That movie was a much more generic horror than this, but it used the smile in much the same way. In both it is a way to tell the viewer and the victim of the presence of the movies antagonist. It’s also not really explained as anything other than just a thing that happens. Both antagonists seem to enjoy toying with their victims, but outside of that there is no real reason for it. It is a gimmick. Despite naming the film after the smile and very successfully focusing the marketing on it, It still feels like a gimmick

The strength of the movie though is in the atmosphere it builds. It’s notable that there are actually only two deaths on screen. Several are mentioned, but only two are actually shown. The vast majority of the horror is the evil entity creeping out Rose and these scares are done very well. Outside of this the movie relies a lot on the the creative cinematography (Interesting, though not always effective) and the discordant noise based music to maintain the atmosphere and it does it well. It’s become a trend with a lot of modern films (Mostly, but not exclusively horror) to have noise based soundtracks. Lots of ambiance, bangs, scrapes and a few discordant notes. I’m not especially fond of this trend, but it works effectively here. Without the creepiness the soundtrack brings to the table, the movie probably wouldn’t work.

Suicide Girls.

The movies is very competently put together, especially consider this is a directorial debut. We have an interesting protagonist. Rose is flawed and damaged, but is aware of both. She knows most of this stems from her guilt over her mother’s death. That trauma plays a key role. It’s hinted that all the Smile entities victims have this kind of past trauma. When she isn’t being abused by the entity, we get to see Rose’s regular life and watch her gradually failing mental state. It’s worth noting the “Birthday present” scene (No spoilers) either demonstrates that the entity can impact the world outside their victim, that it can control her already or possibly that Rose actually did it herself. It poses an interesting question for sure.

Laura the first victim, launches the film and sets the audience up for what to expect. Caitlin Stasey, mostly known for her roles in Australian soap operas, plays the role. As the first victim, the first person controlled by the Smile entity, the first person to provide exposition and the form the entity takes for a lot of the film, everything hinges on her performance. Fortunately she puts in a cracker. You really feel her terror and once she is taken over by the entity it is definitely creepy. I was less impressed with Jessie T. Usher, who just didn’t seem that genuine as a character, but despite being Rose’s fiance had only a small role.

Conclusion.

In conclusion while the smile thing is a bit of a gimmick and not particularly original, the movie itself is pretty good. It is straightforward but well put together. It provides a great creepy atmosphere, gives us a new interesting take on an evil entity (We’re never given a clue as to what it is, so I’m sticking with “Entity”) and gives us an interesting and flawed protagonist who we get to see deteriorate to breaking point. Perhaps the movie could be accused of being a little “One note”, but that persistence to the theme is key to what builds the atmosphere. I do think there could have been more done with it, but Overall I’m impressed and look forward to seeing what Parker Finn does next. This is a 7/10

Rating: 7 out of 10.

Blood Diner (1987)

Well that’s it, the final review of my 2023 October Challenge. This is the low budget horror comedy “Blood Diner” from 1987. The movie was the third of four movies directed by Jackie Kong in a short career likely only made possible by the VHS boom of the 80’s. The movie was written by Michael Sonye, who has had a reasonable career as an actor but only has writing credits for six movies. This is the highest rated on IMDb at 5.3/10. His lowest is rated at 2.8 out of ten. This is one of those movies where much of the cast have only appeared in this one film and many of the ones that have been in other things use shots from this movie as their bio picture on IMDb (Or have no picture). This gives you hint of what to expect!

Bon Appétit.

The plot of the movie revolves around a pair of cannibals and their “Vegetarian” diner. Two brothers and their dead uncle (Now a brain in a jar) are planning to perform an ancient ceremony to resurrect the ancient Lumerian goddess Sheetar. To do this they have to make a number of preparations that mostly involve killing young women, preparing a cannibalistic stew that will make those that consume it turn into feral zombie like cannibals and prepare the sacrifice of a virgin. On their tail are a pair of tough yet bumbling police officers, investigating a what appears to be a serial killer targeting vegetarians.

Junk Food.

Okay, so I’m just going to say it: This is a bad movie. Whenever I review a fairly average movie I usually say “It’s not terrible but…”, well this one is terrible and there is no real “But” to that. There are some good ideas, but the execution of them is so poor that most viewers likely won’t even give it that much credit. It is poorly acted, poorly scripted, badly paced (Rushing from one joke/murder to the next without giving any of it room to breath), music that seems absent half the time it is needed and overstays it’s welcome when it is not, the gore was so comical that it lost all impact and worst of all, it just wasn’t funny.

Most of the humour falls flat. Most of the jokes are either casual but cartoon like violence or general gross out stuff. There were three scenes that were sort of funny. One was the intro, specifically the radio broadcast about the psycho. Another was where one of the brothers has to keep running someone over before he actually dies and another where a woman having seen her friend being chopped up goes to run away, but then runs back because she forgot her handbag. That was it. The rival chef’s ventriloquist dummy could have been funny in theory, but didn’t really work in practice. It felt out of place and just came across as pointless and dumb.

So Bad It’s Bad.

The acting is especially bad. I’ve watched a lot of low budget B-movies, so I have a pretty good tolerance for bad acting, but this was next level bad. Pretty much all the actors playing the police were dreadful. The worst of the bunch was Sheba Jackson as “LaNette La France” and it’s no surprise to see this is her only credit on IMDB. Max Morris was almost as bad as the Police Chief and joins Sheba in the “This is my only acting credit” department. Fortunately Rick Burks and Carl Crew, who played the two cannibal brothers were just regular bad, though the script they had to work with didn’t do them any favours. Drew Godderis also managed a tolerable performance as the brain in a jar psycho uncle, though he is helped by just being a voice actor.

I get the impression half of the joke here is meant to be that the film is really bad. This kind of thing never really works for me. Things being intentionally bad always fail to reach that “So bad it’s good” category. Most humour works best when played straight, most funny low budget movies work best when the makers treat it seriously, no matter how crazy the ideas they are working on are. Here it seemed they spent too long laughing at their own jokes. Really a lot of this plays like a series of sketches haphazardly thrown together, with most of it adding nothing to the overall story.

Concussion.

Ultimately, this is one big fail. The concept could have worked, but not with this director, writer and most of these actors. Some people may be able to get a kick out of it and I think being drunk and/or high will help. But coming in dry, it’s just plain bad. I give it a few points for trying to be fun and for the half decent concept, but the most generous I can be with this one is a low 3.5/10. On a side note, I like the trailer. It’s better than the movie. That’s all. Happy Halloween and whatever your viewing tonight (If anything), I hope it’s better that this!

Rating: 3.5 out of 10.

Five Nights At Freddy’s (2023)

For the penultimate review of my 2023 October Challenge I’m checking out the long anticipated and recently released “Five Nights At Freddy’s”. This is of course based on the hugely successful survival horror video game series from 2014 onwards. So disclaimer up front: Although I own the first few games, I never got around to playing them. I know a reasonable amount about them, but I no doubt missed a lot of references. That said, that also means I’m not going to give the film any bonus points just for including Easter Eggs. This is directed by Emma Tammi

 A Magical Place.

The movie is set mostly at “Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza”, a closed down 80’s diner that is likely based off Chuck E. Cheese that features large animatronic robots that resemble anthropomorphic animals. In the prologue we see the death of the previous security guard at the hands of the animatronic monsters and we are then treated to a pretty cool intro credits sequence involving what appears to be a tribute to the 8-bit style minigames from some of the games. We’ve then introduced to our protagonist “Mike Schmidt” played by Josh Hutcherson (Mike was also the protagonist from the first game). This version of Mike has a young sister Abby (Piper Rubio) he takes care off and a traumatized past where his brother was kidnapped and never seen again.

Mike is desperate to find a job so he doesn’t have to give up custody of his sister to their greedy Aunt Jane (Mary Stuart Masterson). As a result he takes the job of the new night security guard at the Pizzeria. The place has a strange effect on him though, where his recurring dream about the kidnap of his brother is altered to including five mysterious children that he believes may hold the secret to the identity of the kidnapper. Things reach a whole new level of crazy though when he discovers the animatronics are possessed by the souls of murdered children and it’s these children that were appearing to him. This revelation puts him and his sister in imminent danger however, both from the animatronics and their mysterious master.

Horror In The Hallways.

So the first thing to mention here is as far as being a horror goes, the movie is very light. There isn’t really much in the way of jump scares, though the animatronics are done very well and do look pretty menacing. There are kills of course, mostly in one section where Aunt Jane sends a group of thugs to smash up the diner in an attempt to get Mike fired. The problem here really is that all the kills are either people we don’t know (The original security guard) or bad people we are meant to dislike and none of the kills are themselves particularly interesting. The horror elements are also very spread out, so if you turned up to watch people slaughtered by animatronics you will probably be disappointed.

That out of the way, there’s actually a lot of positives with this movie. It just may not be what people expect going in. What it does excel at is the general look. As I mentioned above the animatronics look great and it’s satisfying to see quality practical effects on my screen again. The monsters have enough life to both be able to express basic emotions and to provide a suitable amount of menace. The diner also looks great and the general feel seems to fit really well with what I would expect for something with 80’s ties. Of course 80’s nostalgia has been done to death, but here it used right. Never really pushing it too far, though of course it’s not set in the 80’s that’s just where the diner originates.

The Players And The Game.

The second thing I liked here was how they managed to take the basic premise of the game and work a character driven story into it. This is very much Mike’s movie, but his sister and officer Vanessa Shelly (Played by Elizabeth Lail) all get decent character development. Even the con woman babysitter (Secretly working for his aunt) actually has an implied crisis of conscience after having grown attached to Abby. Through this the movie actually has the feel of a family film and with its PG-13 rating I think parents could find this quite a suitable Halloween film for the family.

In regards to the actors performances I can’t say any particularly stand out. Probably Mary Stuart Masterson is most notable, though her role is short and her character one dimensional. The other characters are absolutely fine, but nothing more. The music is a little hit and miss, in places working very well but in others feeling sort of generic. Having not played the game I don’t know if there were any musical references, but I gather the first game largely used modified public domain music so probably not. The story itself appears to be very true to the main story/theme of the game, with only a few minor modifications which were entirely reasonable to make it work as a film. Of course big fans of the game may disagree on that, I can only go by the broad strokes I’m aware of.

Freddy Vs Willy Vs Banana!

Since this movie was beaten to the screen by two knock off’s of its concept, it’s worth examining how those contrasts with them. The movies I’m talking about here are “The Banana Splits” (2019) and “Willy’s Wonderland” (2021). The Splits was the first out and utilized a licence for the Banana Splits franchise, a legit children’ s program’s variety show that ran from 1970-1982. A bold movie and the movie itself was perhaps the most straight horror of the three. I actually quite enjoyed it and anyone that hasn’t seen it and wanted more horror to this movie should probably give it a shot.

Willy’s Wonderland however was largely a subversion of the concept, where the animatronics (In this case possessed by a serial killer and his acolytes) come across something more terrifying than themselves… Nicholas Cage. It’s actually a huge amount of fun, but must be said is really more about Cage’s character. This one was far more action orientated and far less of a character story since Cage keeps silent the whole time and outside of some obsessive compulsive behaviour is largely just an ass kicking machine.

Despite coming out last, Five Nights At Freddy’s contrasts really well with it’s imitators. It provides something they don’t with its more family friendly, polished and character driven approach and with that, carves out it’s own place in the world of psycho animatronics. Perhaps most importantly though in the head to head, the animatronics simply look much better in this Movie (Credit to the Jim Henson team for that). Is it better though? I think all three films will have their supporters. Personally I preferred WIlly’s Wonderland, but I would say Freddy’s is the objective best of the bunch.

Conclusion.

Overall this was an entertaining film. It dragged a tiny bit in places and the actual horror elements were a bit disappointing both in their number and quality. However it has a great atmosphere, solid character writing and appears to be relatively true to the game. Far truer than most video game adaptations anyway. So this is a strong 6/10. Worth a watch, even if you aren’t a fan of the games.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

Carnival of Souls (1962)

Tonight’s movie is the arty indie movie “Carnival of Souls” from 1962. Loosely based on a French short film and later Twilight Zone episode “An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge”. The setting and characters are drastically changed but the core of the story is the same. This version was directed by Herk Harvey (As his only feature length movie) and stars Candace Hilligoss with main support from Frances Feist and Sidney Berger. Originally it was released as part of a double feature with the Swedish anthology film “The Devil’s Messenger” (Actually a compilation of episodes from a TV show). The movie was largely forgotten until randomly becoming a cult classic in the 80’s. Let’s see if this Carnival is worth visiting.

Life Is A Drag.

The story starts with “Mary Henry” (Hilligoss) and her friends being challenged to a drag race by some young men. During the race Mary’s car goes off a bridge. It appears there are no survivors until someone spots Mary struggling to the shore. A few weeks later she has decided to leave the town and take a job as a church organist in Salt Lake City. Here she is haunted by visions of a strange man (and occasionally over ghoulish apparitions) and finds herself strangely drawn to an old pavilion just outside town where there used to be a carnival.

Mary seems to be indifferent to personal relationships and going through life now almost like in a day dream. When she actually does dream, she dreams of being invisible to people and still pursued by that strange man. Usually when he catches up to her is when she awakens. One day while practicing her organ parts at the church she falls into a kind of trance where she starts playing spooky music (It’s a shame it was six years too early for In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida) and sees people from the carnival dancing around. She is stopped by the reverend who fires and for playing such “Satanic” music. Freaked out, Mary tries to spend the evening with her neighbouring lodger John (Berger) so as to not be alone, but eventually drives him off too. The following day she decides to flee from the town… but can she leave?

A Silent Movie With Sound.

Carnival of Souls is very much an art movie. Director Herk Harvey was influenced by European films of the period such as the works of Igmar Bergman and Jean Cocteau. However, this movie comes across to me more like a silent movie… just with occasional speech. The organ soundtrack is reminiscent of a live musician playing to a silent movies (As well of course being a reference to Mary’s job) and the more silent scenes involving the carnival ghouls have the entities moving around in exaggerated ways that could be right out of a silent film. There is not a great deal of dialogue and that’s probably for the best because the acting is mediocre at best.

The editing and cinematography is well done considering how much of it was filmed guerrilla style (I.e. Rushed and without permit). It’s no masterclass though and is overall quite a mixed bag. Some very impressive spots and some seeming quite amateur. However all together, it fits the tone of the movie. The whole thing is designed to feel like somewhat of a dream and for a very specific reason, which you should have already guessed. Spoilers for the next section, skip to the conclusion if you don’t want to know the twist.

Soul Spoiler Section.

I’ve written before about twist movies, but there are some times where a twist doesn’t make a movie disposable and that’s where the movie doesn’t rely on the shock factor to work. In the case of Carnival of Souls… well, the name is pretty much a giveaway to the story, at least paired with the already quite suspicious intro with the car crash. It’s pretty obvious that Mary is dead so when the car is recovered in the epilogue with her still in it, there was no shock.

But it’s not just the title, the entire tone of the movie, the dreams where Mary can’t be seen by regular people and her aloof nature, not even feeling any desire to be with people, until she was afraid to be alone. All these things laid out Mary’s condition pretty plainly. I don’t know what they did intend with the movie, but in my view it was never meant to be a shock. It was meant to feel inevitable and we were meant to be watching a lost souls journey into accepting the reality of her terrible fate. The story of the ghost that doesn’t realise they are dead is pretty well known these days and a fairly standard part of the horror genre, not sure I can think of earlier examples on film though. So credit for that.

Conclusion

All told this is a very melancholy horror film. Indeed it’s not really much of a horror, it’s more just a sad supernatural story. The ghouls are far from scary, partially because neither the extras playing those roles nor the quality of their make up was especially good. The lead ghoul was actually played by the director, but was not much more convincing than the rest. But none of that is a big problem because as a melancholy supernatural tale it doesn’t need horror. The movie talks to isolation, both self imposed and simply not feeling part of society. It is also a very fatalistic movie. It certainly invokes a vibe.

Overall this movie is a pretty straight line from A to B but presented like a confusing dream. It was always clear where things would lead, and while it embraces that it doesn’t give you a huge amount extra. With very little actually going on in, without any real actors performances of note and with a conceptually interesting but easily forgettable soundtrack this movie ends up feeling overly long, despite the short run time (80 minutes). This is effectively a short movie dragged out into a feature. Which is not surprising considering it is literally based on a short French movie/Twilight Zone episode. This is a strong 5.5/10. Sure to be divisive, artier viewers and those that love good cinematography will enjoy it, those after fun entertainment or engaging characters will probably not.

Rating: 5.5 out of 10.

The Wolf Man (1941)

For tonight’s October Challenge review it’s time to fix a gaping hole in my Horror viewing and check out the Universal Horror classic and one of the earliest werewolf movies “The Wolf Man” from 1941. This wasn’t the first werewolf movie as they’ve been around since 1913. “Werewolf of London” came out only a few years earlier in 1935 and that movie largely created the modern concept of the Werewolf including passing the curse from a bite and full moons triggering the transformation. This however was the gold standard and the most famous Werewolf movie for the next 40 years (Until “American Werewolf in London” came out in 1981)

Whoever Is Bitten By A Werewolf And Lives…

The Wolf Man was written by Curt Siodmak (Robert’s brother) and directed by George Waggner. The movie stars Lon Chaney Jr. in the titular role as “Lawrence Talbot”. The supporting cast included Claude Rains, Warren William, Ralph Bellamy, Bela Lugosi and Evelyn Ankers. Lugosi’s role is brief but pivotal. The movie begins with Lawrence’s return to the Talbot estate after the passing of his brother. He hasn’t been back for a while but he and his father (Played by Rains). Larry becomes infatuated with a local girl called “Gwen” (Ankers) and takes her and her friend “Jenny” to have their fortune read by some local gypsies.

While Jenny is having her fortune read, Larry takes Gwen off for a walk. They hear Jenny screaming and Larry rushes to her to find her being attacked by a wolf. Larry is unable to save Jenny but kills the wolf with his cane (A cane with a silver wolf head on it, purchased from Gwen’s shop earlier in the day). Having been bitten during the struggle, Larry is injured and taken home. The next morning the body Jenny is found alongside a dead gypsy that has been killed with a blunt instrument.

Lawrence is told by another Gypsy that he was bitten by a Werewolf and is now doomed to become one. This upsets Larry, who can sense something is wrong but is not yet willing to accept it. However over the following nights Larry finds he is transformed into something part way between a man and a wolf and though he has no memory of it, he has been killing people while in that form. Larry suspects the truth and as a good man at heart he is broken by it. This is a story that can only end in tragedy.

There’s Something Very Tragic About That Man

This is the archetypal tragic monster story. Larry’s battle is more of an emotional and psychological one than a physical one. From the moment he is bitten he is not the same. No longer bold, confident and charming. Instead he uncertain of himself and of the world around him. Now punished for his act of heroism in facing the wolf by being cursed until the day he dies. Lon Chaney Jr. performs his part perfectly and broadcasts an air of tragedy in every scene he is in after. The rest of the cast is solid, but outside the brief Lugosi appearance nothing particularly stands out.

What does stand out is the visuals. The sets are very well made, the use of fog and lighting make the whole picture very aesthetically pleasing and atmospheric. It would be many years before you could really pull something like this off in colour and this movie makes maximum use of the benefits of black and white. It’s the kind of lighting and shot framing used in this kind of horror movie that would later be a big influence of Film Noir directors.

Bark At The Moon.

Of course this is a very short movie at only one hour and ten minutes long. Fortunately the plot is very focused and straight forward, so there are no obvious holes. This was the standard Universal way of working for these horrors. To a modern viewer now it definitely feels a bit rushed, especially towards the ending.Much like with Frankenstein, most of the movie is the origin story and then it’s a rush to the finish line. In many ways it’s actually a very similar story to American Werewolf and the contrast between the two exposes the two main weaknesses, the first being the legnth.

The second weakness in comparison to modern movies is of course the effects. After American Werewolf showed us a full on Werewolf transformation and The Howling presented truly monstrous Werewolves it’s hard to look back at the limitations of 1941 and fully appreciate what they achieved. The Wolf Man make up does look pretty good and we do see a sort of transformation with spontaneous appearances of hair. The problem is when we see the original Werewolf it is a full on wolf (Or wolf prop for most of that fight). That made it seems sort of strange that Larry doesn’t go full wolf. I guess having Larry fight a man-wolf at the start would have made his skepticism not make sense.

Conclusion

Overall this is a great tragic horror that in some regards has aged badly but still largely holds up. Ultimately Werewolf movies are hard and most of them are not especially good, so that this early entry in the list is still in the top ten (Possibly even top 5) is a great testament to the quality of the film making. In it’s day I’d say this was a 7/10, but for the modern day I rate it a narrow 6/10.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

Nefarious (2023)

Tonight’s October Challenge Review is the recently released independent horror film “Nefarious”. Directed by the combo of Chuck Konzelman and Cary Solomon and based on the novel “A Nefarious Plot” by Steve Deace. This isn’t a combo I would usually expect to entertain me as they’ve mostly done religious movies in the past, but I’d heard good things about this movie so wanted to check it out. The two leads for the movie are Sean Patrick Flanery and Jordan Belfi. Flannery is probably most famous for “The Boondock Saints” and was always a capable actor, though probably has more misses than hits to his name. Belfi meanwhile is mostly a TV actor, but a capable one. Its a solid choice of actors for an independent movie.

A Nefarious Plot.

The plot of the movie is relatively simple on the surface. The psychiatrist Dr. James Martin has been called in at the last minute to assess the mental state of prolific serial killer Edward Wayne Brady so that he can be executed (By the electric chair, something he requested himself). He is a last minute replacement since the previous psychiatrist committed suicide. Most of the rest of the story is the conversation between the two of them, with the occasional brief interlude. In that conversation Brady claims to be a demon, and begins a psychological battle with the psychiatrist in an attempt to get him to publish his book, a sort of demonic bible. The demon has been studying Martin ever since he was a boy and knows exactly what buttons to push and when.

During the interview and while Martin is still fully skeptical Brady/Nefariamus convinces him to invite the demon inside him to prove that he is lying. Nothing happens, at least not at that point. But from then on Brady/Nefariamus has the upper hand. He tells Martin he will commit three murders before he leaves. These murders are entirely subjective and part of the mind games. To cover any more of the plot would be spoilers though.

Interlude.

This is a movie that had great word of mouth from viewers, but has been slammed by politically partisan critics that effectively review bomb anything they even suspect of leaning right or being at all Christian. For example “Joker”, which I don’t personally consider right wing, but the critics did, not just suffered unfair review bombing from those critics, but also a media campaign to dissuade people from viewing in fear of supposed “Incel murder sprees” they claimed would take place in the cinema. Yes this is a thing that happened and it’s bizarre people still give those that manufactured that panic a pass.

In this case the critics seem to object to the Christian leanings in the film and yet the idea of complaining about such leanings in a film literally about demonic possession is the kind of absurdness that leads to… Well, the recent Exorcist film, that presents a demonic possession based on a very Christian demon and yet seems ashamed of the existence of Christianity. Bizarre. It used to be the scene in the Exorcist that offended people was when Regan masturbates with a crucifix. Now it’s saying “The power of Christ compels you”.

Yes it’s undeniable that it has Christian leanings especially considering Konzelman and Solomon’s previous output, but having seen the film it’s clear in this case the reviewers are not being objective. One of their complaints is that they think the demon is acting as the mouth piece for the directors views. It’s odd to complain about a character that is the embodiment of pure evil expressing opinions they don’t like. Maybe it’s a demon rights thing. Anyway, let’s get back to the review.

Two Men In Alone In A Room… Or Are They?

Considering this movie is almost entirely two men in a room talking, it is incredibly effective. A movie like that requires two strong actors and we have that here with Flannery and Belfi, both of whom put in a career best here. Flannery especially is remarkably good both as the demon and it’s victim. It also requires strong writing as it’s going to be very easy to pick at a film that is almost entirely dialogue. Not all the dialogue was completely convincing for me, but about three quarters of it worked well and that’s a pretty good ratio for a movie was so much of it. I have to give credit to Konzelman and Solomon. Of course I’ve not read the source material, so I don’t know how much is them and how much is from the novel.

In regards to the possession side of things, this feels to me in some ways a spiritual successor to the Denzel Washington movie “Fallen” from 1998. The demon can’t jump bodies as quickly as that one, but using it’s victims to commit horrible murders is pretty similar and the demon feels a lot like the one in that movie. The main difference of course is the smaller budget and scale. There’s only two scenes that come close to action here, so the style is different but the tone really reminds of that 90’s classic. While not unique, it is a rarer way to portray demonic possession. It’s nice to occasionally break away from the usual child possession stuff.

Letting Evil In.

There’s nothing really to talk about effects wise and there is very little music, though what is there is used effectively. Where there is music it is very subtle, slow and suspenseful. Mostly it is present in the scenes between the interviews. During the monologues it is mostly silent and that makes those scenes even more menacing. Despite being dialogue heavy, it’s actually a relatively fast paced movie with a lot of intensity. Even though I am agnostic and this does have an undeniable Christian slant, ideas such as the dangers of inviting evil into your life are universal to the human condition. Plus of course from a mythological/story point of view, the idea that evil may be winning the eternal war in always a great horror premise

Conclusion.

This one deserves a strong 7/10 and I think most people I think will find this compelling. The exception being if you are offended by the Christian slant. It probably would have benefited from toning that down a little (and it may have cost it a 7.5/10 from me). However, it’s definitely not required to be a believer to find this compelling. I mean, you don’t need to believe in vampires to enjoy Dracula do you? For me this is the best movies I’ve seen so far this October, but there are a few more days left, so we’ll see if it still has it’s crown by the 31st.

Rating: 7.5 out of 10.