Tonight I’m reviewing “Lords of Chaos” from 2018. This is based on a true story and while changes have been made for dramatic effect I cannot emphasize enough that the reality may be stranger than fiction. This is also a story of additional interest to me as someone that has spent most of their life studying and working around music and musicians, so getting a fly on the wall view of one of the most messed up music scenes in history is fascinating.
Black Metal.
This is the story of the Norwegian Black Metal scene of the early 90’s. It’s focus is Mahem (Band), Helvete (Record Store) and Deathlike Silence Productions (Label) founder Øystein Aarseth, a.k.a. “Euronymous”. The movie is directed by Jonas Åkerlund, with a screenplay by Akerlund and Dennis Magnusson. It is based off the book by the same name by Michael Moynihan and Didrik Søderlind. It’s worth noting though Åkerlund is mostly known for music videos, he does have ties to the Black Metal scene as a former drummer of the band “Bathory”. While not part of this particular scene, they were a big influence on it.
Before moving on, I should add that since this is based on a fairly well know true story, most of this review is full of spoilers. So I won’t be pointing each one out, it’s just too hard to talk about this movie without mentioning the events. You have been warned!
Voice Of A Tortured Skull.
The star of the movie is Rory Culkin (Macaulay’s brother) as the notorious Euonymous. In many ways the film is also a bit of a Neo-Noir since it gives the doomed character the role of narrator alongside being the protagonist. In the film, Euronymous is portrayed as having a role in the scene lands some way between the role John Lydon and Malcom MacClaren had in the Punk Scene of the 1970’s. He thrives on being deliberately controversial and antagonistic, but there is a big question of how much of it is genuine and how much is just marketing. The truth of that is something that has been debated since the 90’s, but this movie definitely pushes the idea that he was only ever about the hype and never really believed in any of it.
The secondary character of our story Kristian ‘Varg’ Vikernes (Played by Emory Cohen) is portrayed as a bit of a Sid Vicious character. A fan and scene member that is determined to turn all of the hype into reality. I would call him a true believer, but as pointed out by some journalists that interview him during one scene his beliefs are actually very broad and vague. He’s vaguely a Satanist but also supports the Norse Gods and is vaguely a Nazi. When we meet him, he is embarrassed by having a “Scorpions” patch on his jacket, which he goes home and removes shortly after. He’s basically portrayed as obsessed with what people think of him and determined to be the most Black Metal of the Black Circle (The group of friends within the scene).
Funeral Fog.
If not clear yet, the movie doesn’t have much respect for these characters. The rest of the group is portrayed as mostly stupid and easily lead. There are the occasional exception where someone walks away from the craziness, starting after the suicide of Mahem’s original front-man “Dead” (played by Jack Kilmer). Euonymous’ reaction to the suicide is to immediately turn it into a hype/publicity exercise, taking a series of photos , and creating necklaces with skull fragments, which he would give to circle members. This causes band member “Necrobutcher” to quit in disgust. But for better or worse the incident helped really kick off the scene both in reality and in this story.
When Vikernes joins the group, after some initial mocking (For not drinking or eating meat) he ends up the one that takes things to the next level by going out and burning down a nearby Church. Euonymous attempts to take credit for, for “Inspiring” him. This clearly plants the first seeds of doubt into Vikernes that the scene founder may not be the man he thought he was. The stunt increases the hype surrounding the scene and leads to the circle becoming competitive. From then on each member sets out to try and be the most outrageous on the scene.
From The Dark Past.
Several more Churches are burned down, but things escalate further when one of the members “Faust” commits a murder. Between all this we see Culkin doing a great job of showing a character torn between a desire to stay on top of the scene as the main guy while also realizing he’s way over his head and may not be able to stop what he has unleashed. After Varg Vikernes foolishly goes to the media the rift between him and Euonymous grows to a boiling point. This leads Vikernes to commits the final black act of the movie, killing our narrator and protagonist.
What we are looking at here is how a community can become toxic, where the need to fit in and peer pressure can drive people to do outrageous acts. It also shows how buying into ones own hype can lead to self destruction. In the end, the most infamous act of the scene is the murder of it’s founding member. There is definite poetry to this since in the movie he is portrayed as being obsessed with creating a legacy through infamy. Whether that reflects the real Euonymous or not is something we will probably never know.
Cursed in Eternity.
In regards to the violence in the movie, we’re only really talking about two murders but they are portrayed as realistically and brutally as possible. The scenes are actually quite disturbing and that seems fitting consider we are seeing fictional depictions of real murders.
This is a cautionary tale for sure, warning of the dangers of hype, nihilism, peer pressure and the desire to fit in. This isn’t the only music scene that lead to extreme self destruction from those that couldn’t tell the difference between reality and hype, though it may have become the most messed up generally. Usually the true believers only end up destroying themselves, but sometimes they ruin other lives. If you want to understand how people become extremists and terrorists examining the psychology behind the Early Norwegian Black Metal scene wouldn’t be a bad place to start.
Buried by Time and Dust.
This is a movie both fascinating and disturbing, but also occasionally funny. It’s well performed and has a powerful message. To think this could only happen in one scene would be foolish. Young people, easily influenced and determined to fit in can be very dangerous. If we build a world that encourages narcissism and nihilism how do we expect it to end up? I’m not sure if that is all deliberate commentary by the director but it’s what I took from the movie. Anyway, I’m giving this a 7/10.
Tonight’s horror movie is cult 80’s Werewolf movie “Wolfen”. I came across this via a cult movie facebook group and being a fan of Werewolves it was a no brainer to check out as part of my October Challenge for this year. The movie is based on the Whitley Strieber novel “The Wolfen” from 1978 (Strieber also wrote “Communion” and “The Hunger”, both becoming cult movies in their own right. If you know about “Communion” you will be aware that Strieber claims to have been a victim of Alien abduction himself, though that abduction is alleged to have happened several years after writing “The Wolfen”.
Huff and Puff
The movie is directed by Michael Wadleigh, who is mostly famous as a cinematographer for live music documentaries. Most notably he directed the Oscar winning Woodstock documentary. This however is his only feature film which makes him a peculiar choice. Similarly the screenwriter David Eyre had only penned one previous movie, the Western “Cattle Annie and Little Britches” (1980). No lack of experience for the movies star though, Albert Finney who had a very high profile career in the 70’s.
The main support comes from Diane Venora, though there is a smaller supporting role for Edward James Olmos, who plays a Native American suspected of knowing something about the attacks. Omost was always able to shine even in small roles and he does once again here.
One of the first things of note is the James Horner soundtrack. The thing with Horner in this period is his soundtracks largely were interchangeable. This movie is in between “Battle Beyond the Stars” (1980) and “The Wrath of Khan” (1982) and the soundtrack is incredibly similar to both, despite this being a Horror and those Sci-Fi Space Operas. However, even if similar it’s still good and even the more grandiose themes actually fit with this particular horror, so I’ll give the similarities a pass.
Wolf-Vision™
In regards to effects and gore, this movie has become quite dated. The visual effects to show the “Wolf Vision” are reminiscent of Predator and given this movie is from several years earlier it’s entirely possible Wolfen influenced the later more famous movie. However in Predator those effects actually mean something (The Predator seeing heat), while here it’s literally just to let us know we are seeing the monster’s point of view. It’s not like the visuals reflect how a wolf would see things (Which would mostly be smells).
The gore meanwhile is somewhat lacking for an 80’s movie, but advancements in that department were fairly new and this movie was probably in production before those techniques had really spread through the industry. The movie features a lot of dismemberment, but each time it is done by showing the victim about to be hit, then showing some nearby pavement and someone off camera obviously throws the fake limb to the floor. It’s actually sort of funny. Still, despite that, the film mostly practices a “What you don’t see” approach and that part works very well for it.
Wolfen Down Your Senators
Despite being from 1981, this is a movie that definitely belongs among 70’s horror and the backdrops, filming style and especially the “Technology” has 1970’s written all over. Really everything outside of the Soundtrack fits better in the Seventies. Not that this is a problem, since the tone of the story is more in line with movies from that decade anyway. It actually feels more like a Drama or Science Fiction Film for the most part. Reminding me a lot of the Quatermass movies/shows and I think Finney would have made a great Quatermass has the opportunity came up.
It’s important to note thishis isn’t your standard Werewolf story. The Wolfen aren’t technically Werewolves, they are an entirely different species of intelligent, supernatural wolves that have lived secretly among mankind for centuries. This is actually a “Man shouldn’t mess with Nature” story, with strong ties to the Native American community.. These it’s worth noting are changes from the book, Wadleigh is an environmental activist so it’s not a big surprise to see him rework the story in this manner.
Bark At The Moon
Really for a first time director, Wadleigh did a pretty good job and his inexperience likely lead to some of the more creative choices, including the Wolf-Vision™. But is this a great Werewolf(ish) movie? Not really. It’s hard not to compare this to “American Werewolf in London” and “The Howling”, both of which also came out the same year. But while those were ground breaking and have been heavily imitated since, Wolfen’s paws are firmly in the past. This is a 70’s movie at heart for good or ill.
However as I mentioned this isn’t really a Werewolf movie, so it deserves some slack in that regard. The movie definitely has a lot of charm to it too and I can see why it became a cult favourite. The performances and music are above average, the visuals are mixed bag of good and bad and the plot is unique but not especially compelling. This just about hits a 6/10.
For tonight’s October horror review I’m watching the Kiefer Sutherland horror “Mirrors” from 2008. As the name suggests this is a horror revolving around mirrors. It’s not the most original concept as many horrors have made use of mirrors. The mirror scare is a well know trope and going further films like John Carpenter’s Prince of Darkness had the devil try and enter our world through a mirror (And this was a two way portal too). Similarly the movie Legend has The Lord of Darkness able to use mirrors as portals and the end of Phantasm has The Tall man attack from within a Mirror.
ediS rehtO ehT
This movie itself is loosely based on a Korean horror called “Into the Mirror” (2003). Quite often with these Americanized versions they lose the depth and subtext of the originals and instead offer up fairly dry by the numbers interpretations. This version was directed by Alexandre Aja, with a screenplay from Aja and Gregory Levasseur. Looking into it (As I’ve not seen the Korean movie), it appears Aja threw away the original scripts that were a direct remake and went in his own direction only utilizing a few aspect (And hence why the movie is not called “Into the Mirror”). A bold strategy for sure. I’m not sure it paid off however.
What this version does have going for it is Keither Sutherland, a solid veteran actor with several decent horrors to his name. He plays ex-cop turned security guard “Ben Carson”. He is joined by Paula Patton as his wife and Amy Smart as his sister. The focus is very much on Sutherland though and that is for the best. In brief he was a detective but is on suspension (For reasons that factor into nothing) and has taken a job as a night security guard at an old shut down department store (Which had been gutted by a fire several years previously). While there he begins seeing things in the mirrors and realities something very evil resides behind them. I’ll be hitting spoilers now, so skip to the end if you don’t want spoilers.
rirroM rirroM
Ben has a lot of elements to his backstory that never really factor in that much to his story. His suspension is talked about briefly and moved on from. His alcoholism is talked about briefly, thrown in as a reason why people don’t believe what he tells them and then forgotten. When he discovers his sister has been murdered Sutherland does his best with the scene, but the plot seems barely bothered by it following this. Indeed the police having found a woman with her jaw physically torn off her while she lay in the bath seem fairly unconcerned.
But that’s far from the only thing that shows the lazy writing behind this. The evil itself is a demon that passed from the woman it had possessed into the mirror world. That demon can kill anyone, anywhere there is a reflective surface and we are told it then feeds on the souls of that person. Yet despite that it is obsessed with returning to the body of the woman it possessed, thereby losing those powers and being vulnerable to being killed. This is especially silly given the woman is very old at this point and you can’t imagine her body would last that long. But the demon really wants out for some reason and the good guys want to give it what it wants apparently just assuming that will be a better situation.
noisulcnoC
So nonsensical plot and poor character writing aside, was there anything to this movie? Well there are a few scenes with some cool mirror horror in it. We have some creative visuals, though none of it is really anything truly original (As I mentioned, mirror tropes are common in Horror). The most original elements were when the characters reflections appear, do harm to themselves and that harm impacts the viewer. The problem is the mirror monster is only as powerful as the plot needs it to be at that point. It’s unclear if it likes messing with people first. When Ben has brought the vessel the monster seeks to the building, it continues to vaguely try and murder his family, but in ways that suggest it doesn’t really want to kill them (Especially given what happened to Ben’s sister).
So overall, between the visuals and having Sutherland as lead there was enough to entertain me for the duration. It helps the plot doesn’t drag, it just rarely makes sense and often feels lazy and generic. The truth is it probably could have done with a few more character moments which could have been traded for a few less plot hoops to jump through before we find out what it’s actually all about. Given that conclusion was a disappointment, the journey feels somewhat pointless. This movie just about scrapes a 5/10.
At the crossroads between the gory slashers of the 1980’s and the gritty, anything goes horrors of the 1970’s sits this David Schmoeller directed classic supernatural pro-slasher from 1979. Produced for Charlie Band’s production company and considered one of the better movies he produced (Which given he’s made over 300, that’s a good accolade). Originally this was intended to be directed by John Carpenter, but the deal fell through on terms (It’s unclear if this was on pay, Carpenter getting final cut or something else) and Schmoeller was asked to direct his own pitch.
The Trap
Written by Schmoeller and J. Larry Carroll, the movie features Chuck Connors (Who would later play the main villain in the 80’s “Werewolf” series) as Slauson, a psychotic with supernatural powers including the ability to animate mannequins. The main support come from Jocelyn Jones and Jon Van Ness. In the timeline of horror this sits between Halloween and Friday the 13th and while it is mostly supernatural it definitely has slasher elements. So let’s see if it still holds up 44 years later.
The set up is fairly standard horror stuff (It wasn’t as cliché in 1979, but it wasn’t exactly original either), a group of young adults travelling through the California desert get a flat tire and end up taking refuge in an old tourist trap (That has been shut down since they built the highway through the area). They meet old man Slauson who appears to live there alone after his wife died and his brother went to Hollywood to build animatronics. Naturally they start getting picked off one by one until we’re left with a final girl (It wasn’t always a girl, but is here).
Psionic Psycho
But this isn’t a standard slasher. It actually seems to draw influence from a variety of 70’s horrors. Not just the gritty proto-slashers like “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” (1974), “The Town That Dreaded Sundown” (1976), “The Hills Have Eyes” (1977) and of course “Halloween” (1978), but also supernatural films like “Carrie” (1976), and “The Omen” (1976). Slauson’s abilities are never explained (And didn’t need to be). He is unnaturally strong, can move objects with his mind and cause mannequins to act like they are alive. Even on occasion giving them the appearance of being human. He can also do this in reverse: Turning people into mannequins. It seems the destiny of his victims is to end up as mannequins for his macabre collection.
These abilities are paired with a playful sadism where he seems to enjoy toying with his victims to elicit the maximum amount of terror. Even at one point deliberately causing a victim to die of fright. Though it’s clear Slauson is mad, it’s never quite clear how mad. For a while he pretends to be his brother Davey and acts like he is even saying he wants to kill Slauson, but once the ploy is revealed his brother is forgotten. More confusing perhaps is how he talks to his mannequins. Given his powers, this perhaps isn’t as crazy as it first appears.
Death, Dolls and Doctor Phibes
Cast wise, the youngsters were all fine. Nothing special, even for the final girl, but nothing bad either. But this is Connors’ movie and he puts in a solid and believable performance. Especially effective was his monotone voice when he is in psycho mode that really increased the creepiness. The music matches the movies tone of quirky and creepy in equal measures. I would have preferred it a little less quirky, but it’s still a good score that does it’s job well. Well enough that I actually found myself listening while I write this review.
While a lot of the set up, chase and cat and mouse games between Slauson and his victims feel quite dated by today’s standards, the movie excels with the creepiness of the murder scenes and the variety it manages while maintaining the overall theme. We have death by telekinesis, death by animatronics, a torture murder that could have come straight out of a Doctor Phibes’ film (Another clear influence) and a death by… <SPOILER> … randomly turning into a mannequin. <END SPOILER> I also liked the general grittiness of it, simple touches like having a victim’s teeth bleed as he desperately tries to bite through the ropes binding him to save a woman from being killed. It all helps the feel.
The Ending (SPOILERS)
The ending of the movie is an interesting one and leaves it a little open to interpretation. As I mentioned one murder involves a character going from about to attack Slauson with an axe to turning into a mannequin and having their arm and then head pulled off. After this all the mannequin’s become life like with the mannequin of Slauson’s wife taking on a human form. The final girl kills Slauson and then drives off with the mannequin versions of her friends in her car…. Yes it’s a very strange ending.
I can’t help but wonder if we are meant to conclude that all the characters other than Slauson, including the final girl were mannequins all along. That theory could go as far as saying the whole thing is just a crazy guy playing with his dolls. Perhaps. Alternatively maybe Molly has just gone mad herself now (Seems to be Wikipedia’s view) or maybe she’s not mad (But still obviously traumatized) and just didn’t want to leave her friends remains, even in doll form, in the Tourist Trap.
Yes, this 1979 movie has Trollface in it decades before it became a meme.
Conclusion
This is a bit of a hidden gem and likely a lot of fun for fans of 70’s horror. The movie is gritty, smart and ridiculous in equal measures. It does feel notably cheap though and shares a flaw in common with a lot of modern horrors in that I didn’t really care about any of the victims. However this is a 40+ year old film in a very saturated Horror genre that still manages to feel original. That pushes my score up to a narrow 6.5/10. This deserves it’s status as a cult classic.
Last October I was introduced to Brandon Cronenberg, son of David Cronenberg through his movie “Infinity Pool” (2022). While it wasn’t one of my top films of the year, I was impressed by Brandon’s style and interested by both the similarities and differences with his father. So for this years Halloween Challenge I had a look for anything else directed by Brandon and found “Possessor”. It actually scores higher than Infinity Pool on IMDB (and more than Brandon’s only other feature film “Antiviral” (2012). So it seemed worth a shot. Possibly several shots and a few stabbings. Let’s find out!
Familiar Territory.
Written and Directed by Brandon Cronenberg, possessor stars Andrea Riseborough (as “Tasya Vos”) and Christopher Abbott (As “Colin Tate” and “Tasya Vos” in Tate’s body). It also has a support role for Jennifer Jason Leigh (Who also starred in David Cronenberg’s “Existenz” (1999)) and Sean Bean who you naturally assume is not going to survive the movie, but I’m not giving spoilers. The set up is very much something from a Science Fiction Action movie and had it been in that genre I’d probably comment on it not being especially interesting. However, this is Brandon Cronenberg, so I’m not expecting explosions and car chases.
Much like with Infinity Pool, the plot here is based on a fairly out there science fiction concept, in this case taking control of another persons body and using it to perform assassinations. Both movies are also sort of casual about it, the movie doesn’t appear to be set notably in the future and there is no real explanation about the technology. It ultimately is not about the tech and instead more about human psychology and the film uses the technology to examine that.
What It Is About And What It Really Is About.
True to form, the story seems barely interested in the actual assassination job for which Vos was hired, instead it is really about her mental state and that of her victims. This is a film about identity and the dark desires that hide in the back of peoples’ minds and provides a conclusion that is… well, very Cronenberg. Like with Infinity Pool, the classic Body Horror stuff you tend to expect from the family is present but used sparingly (Except on the marketing material, where it’s overused to the point that it could be called misleading).
What grounds the film more in Horror than Sci-Fi is we are looking at the main characters journey into her own darkness. Shedding her humanity (Much of which seemed to be faked, reacting as people would expect instead of how she feels). While this is laid out for the viewer fairly early on, the journey still offers some surprises and there are perhaps some double meanings behind a few of the scenes. Pacing wise it is a little slow with probably too much focus on people having sex (Another Cronenberg trait) but neither of these are particularly problematic. The film has a feel of a dream and the Jim Williams soundtrack is clearly designed to emphasize this.
Dark Desires
Abbott and Riseborough put in solid performances. Both play Vos, but in Abbots case only while she is in Tate’s body. This means Abbott has to convince the viewer he is two different people in one body, in some cases including Vos pretending to be Tate and others in a way that is meant to feel like it could be either. He does this pretty well. Risenborough meanwhile gets to play Vos as herself, which is largely unemotional and cold, but underneath that a character disturbed and frustrated by her own emotions. She does it well.
Overall I feel about this movie a lot like I did with Infinity Pool. It is interesting and well executed. However, it is a pretty linear feeling journey where we always feel like we are just slowly plodding from A to B. There is a little bit of depth but not enough to really drive discussion. The technology involved is one that obviously opens a lot of philosophical debate (Like in Infinity Pool) and yet Brandon (Again) ignores most of that to hyper focus on a fairly simple character journey.
Once again this feels like taking a David Cronenberg film and watering it down a bit to make it more accessible to the audience. The end result is a movie I definitely enjoyed, but will probably not watch a second time. I can’t help but feel Brandon has an all time great Horror in him, but this isn’t it. It is instead a narrow 6/10.
For today’s review I’m checking in on an 80’s Wes Craven movie that somehow never made it on to my screen until now. This is “Deadly Friend” from 1986. Sandwiched between two of Craven’s best movies 1984’s “Nightmare on Elm Street” and 1988’s “Serpent and the Rainbow” you’d think this was peak Craven, but Wes was never particularly consistent and this movie doesn’t have the best reputation. Then again neither did “Shocker” from 1989 and that is one of my top guilty pleasures (Most of which are in the Horror genre, naturally). So let’s see where this one lands.
BB Thing
The movie was written by Bruce Joel Rubin (Ghost, Jacob’s Lader) and is based off the novel “Friend” by Diana Henstell. It Stars Kirsty Swanson (The future big screen “Buffy The Vampire Slayer”) as “Samantha”, a girl with an abuse drunk father and Matthew Labyorteaux as “Paul”, a boy genius that has just moved into the area.
The plot is more than a little far fetched since right at the start we are introduced to “BB”, a full AI robot that Paul seems to have just thrown together in his spare time. Of course being a horror we are introduced to it strangling a would be thief trying to steal from the family car, not realising the robot was in the back. As the family come back to the car, the robot lets the thief go, but clearly we are meant to know this AI was always dangerous.
Two Minds, One Rampage
Choking aside the first half of the movie has shades of your standard 80’s family movie. The robot reminds me a little of Johnny 5 from Short Circuit (But cheaper, which makes sense given it’s not a military construction), but with a very 80’s slasher movie set up where we are introduced to a string of obnoxious characters that we all know won’t be making it to the end of the movie. None of this is bad though, just a little bit quirky and if you grew up in the 80’s likely a little nostalgic.
The second half of the movie is more of a mixed bag. Following BB’s demise at the hands of a shotgun totting grumpy old woman and Samantha’s at the hands of her father, the pair are effectively merged into the titular “Deadly Friend”. Paul determined to save Samantha (Who is brain dead and about to have her life support cut off) comes up with a crazy idea to use the chip from BB to fix her brain (Likening it to a simpel pacemaker). This is clearly a bad idea, but Paul is a bit of a mad scientist, totally oblivious to the slightly psychotic nature of the AI he created.
Bad Makeup
The biggest problem here is that Kirsty Swanson with excessive black eye shadow and doing the zombie walk isn’t exactly terrifying. But I don’t blame her for that, the set up of being a basically a cyborg zombie doesn’t leave a lot you can do as an actor to be terrifying, it really is down to the make up job and directing and this is one of the laziest make up jobs in monster movie history. They could have ramped up the cyborg part a bit or alternatively not had her be a total zombie, so she can move quickly. But we got what we got. The two main revenge scenes are actually pretty good, though one plays more seriously and the other just made me laugh out loud for the cartoon gore (Spoiler: This features a full on head explosion).
Ultimately the movie feels very confused, like it was trying to be a bit of everything and as a result didn’t really achieve anything of note. Despite a few good scenes and an interesting concept, the movie ultimately just doesn’t work. This narrowly scrapes a 5.5/10, not terrible but definitely one of Wes Craven’s weakest.
There are an endless number of Horror franchises out there. Some big, some small. Quite a few of them I have only seen the first movie and never got around to the sequels. One such movie is Maniac Cop. The original movie starred Tom Atkins, Bruce Campbell and Laurene Landon and ended with the apparent demise of the titular character in a watery grave at the end. Of course anyone that watched Horror movies in the 80’s knows that’s basically a guarantee of a return in a sequel and so here we are!
Director William Lustig (Who also directed “Maniac” which I’ll be reviewing later in October) and Writer Larry Cohen both return for this sequel and so it’s no surprise to find it continues directly on from the end of the first film and see’s the return of both Campbell and Landon. However the leads for this movie are actually Robert Davi (One of my favourite Bond Villains) and Claudia Christian (Of “Babylon 5” fame, but also made an appearance in my October Horrothon last year in “The Hidden” (1987)). Lustig has a habit of swerving with his leads and never hesitates to kill one off for shock value, so expect this movie to follow that pattern (Though I’m not dropping direct spoilers).
Cunning Stunts
The first thing to note here is I like the way the story is continued. It’s difficult to cover without spoilers, but it’s worthy of note for a horror sequel to maintain such solid continuity. Of course it helps when you have the same writer and director, but it’s certainly refreshing. The second thing to note is the stunts. For a 1990 horror movie, it is somewhat surprising in the number and quality of stunts here.
There is a very solid car chase, a scene where Claudia Christian (Or rather her stunt double) is handcuffed outside an out of control car and has to somehow try and steer it while being flung around and last but not least there is a climax that features a lot of stunt men being set on fire, with the killer himself spending a lot of time wondering around while on fire! It’s pretty impressive for a $4m horror film ($9m with inflation). The movie also features a “Terminator” like scene where Cordell invades the police station and clears house. Basically lots of cool stuff to enjoy visually in this.
Cops and Killers
Character wise the movie revolves primarily around four characters. Claudia Christians “Susan Riley”, Robert Davi’s “Detective McKinney”, The Maniac Cop “Matt Cordell” (Played by Robert Z’Dar, who the following year would become an even more infamous cop in “Samurai Cop”) and Leo Rossi’s “Turkel”, a serial killer that has been murdering local strippers. Davi puts in a pretty neutral performance and seems less interested in the movie the further on it goes, Rossi overacts, though given his character is a psycho it mostly works and Christian puts in a solid performance hitting all the right notes when requires.
The real protagonist of the story though is Cordell and Z’Dar does a pretty decent job given he’s playing a zombie cop. The other three are just there to move the plot on as required. McKinney is the hero of the day, but not because of any challenge he had to overcome and he doesn’t face off with Cordell or really have any notable action scenes, he just helps clear Cordells name (At least clear his name pre-zombie-psycho-rampage). Susan’s importance largely rolls off for the final act, while Turkel turns up half way through and is only really there to be manipulated. His character has the least depth of the four, but he doesn’t really need any for the plot to work.
Conclusion
Overall, this is a surprisingly good sequel to a moderately decent 80’s slasher. I think I may even prefer it to the original. My only real negative is I would have liked to have seen more of Bruce Campbell, but then since this is after Evil Dead 2 it probably would have taken too much attention away from the killer, so perhaps it’s for the best. Largely for the cool factor and the stunts this just about reaches 6.5/10.
The second movie of my 2023 October Horrorthon is one I’ve been looking forward to for a fair while. This is a Dracula movie with a bit of a twist in that it focuses on one specific chapter from Bram Stoker’s Novel. As the name suggests this is about Dracula’s journey to England on board a vessel known as “The Demeter”. For those that haven’t read the book, it’s worth noting it is an epistolary novel, that is the story is conveyed via a series of letters, diary entries and logs. This chapter in particular is written in the form of the Captain’s Log. This gives a lot of freedom in telling this story on screen since the source material is intentionally vague.
The Long Journey ahead
The movie is directed by André Øvredal (Troll Hunter, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark) and written by Bragi F. Schut (Escape Room) and Zak Olkewicz (Bullet Train). The cast features some strong acting talent (If not the biggest name draws) with Corey Hawkins (Straight Outta Compton, The Tragedy of MacBeth) taking the lead, and Game of Thrones alumnis Liam Cunningham (As the Captain) and Aisling Franciosi (A Stowaway) offering the main support.
The first thing to note here is that Hawkins’ character of “Clemens” is original to this movie. Clemens is a Doctor looking to travel back to England, as a man of Science he naturally will have to face that the world has more to it than he can easily understand. In the book the crew had sailed with the Captain many times, but this tweak in minor. Anna (Franciosi) is also an addition and a little more against the source material as she is a stowaway (In the book they searched the ship thoroughly and found no one not meant to be there). Still it’s a reasonable change and her role is important to the story, as she is the primary exposition character.
Nosferatu
The most interesting element of the film is Dracula himself, who is presented in a far more monstrous form than we are used to. It is a little reminiscent of Count Orlok in “Nosferatu” (1922), a film that still holds up shockingly well for a hundred and one year old silent movie. I appreciate this approach not just because I’m a fan of Nosferatu but because I like Vampires that are actually terrifying. This is about as opposite to something like “Twilight” that you can get. On top of this they kept his presence mysterious and minimal so as to maintain the atmosphere of terror throughout.
Despite the miniscule amount of source material (Honestly, it’s barely a chapter), you may be concerned that with a nearly two hour run time things may drag but the pacing is spot on and builds perfectly to it’s climax. In regards to the characters, none really stand out but they do have depth and all fill their roles adequately and believably. As I mentioned at the start this is a strong cast of quality actors, none of them are big name draws but for a horror film you don’t really need that.
Having Your Cake And Eating It Too
The film manages the impressive feat of both maintaining accuracy to the source while putting their own twist on the story and it does it in a way that adds to the original instead of taking away from it. This is a rare example of an adaptation actually getting to have it’s cake and being able to eat it. All too often there is a battle between staying true to the source and finding something new to say. but here that is a non-issue. Of course it helps when you are adapting something short and deliberately vague!
In conclusion, while not the best Dracula film ever made this is a strong entry into the mythos and refreshingly original. Vampires are finally scary again! This is a 7/10.
October has rolled around once more and that means it is time for the Horror Review challenge. For the third year running (Fourth including my pre-blog Facebook/Minds reviews), I’ll be reviewing a horror or horror adjacent movie every day for 31 days. First up is A24’s Porno gone wrong story “X” featuring two modern Scream Queens in Mia Goth (In a double role) and Jenna Ortega. But did the movie live up to they hype? Let’s have a look.
King of Average.
First thing to note here is that this is a Ti West movie. If you’ve been following my blog you will know I was not impressed at all with his “The Innkeepers” (2011). I am yet to watch “House of the Devil” (2009) or the prequel to “this “X”, “Pearl” (2022) both of which are fairly well regarded, so I’m not viewing this with especially high expectations. However, West certainly has a lot of experience in the genre having worked on many Horror based TV shows over the years. If I was to compare him to another director it would probably be Mick Garris. Competent, experienced, but not especially outstanding.
The premise is a fairly standard Horror affair. A small group of young people heading to a remote location, having lots of sex and getting picked off one by one. In this instance we’re in a 1970’s setting and they are in the location to shoot a porno. It’s a pretty similar set up to “Wrestlemaniac/El Mascarado Massacre” (2006), which isn’t a great sign since that was an awful movie. The key differences are this movie actually does show a lot of the porno side and instead of a crazed Rey Misterio Snr. killing everyone it’s two old farmers. Neither of these are really improvements!
It’s All About Mia
The movie relies a lot on trying to creep you out because the old people are old. That’s probably something that only really works on the younger audience, for me it just seemed a bit sad. Other than that there is a whole lot of sex and then about half an hour of standard slasher stuff. Mia Goth does stand out as the only characters with any real depth though the film essentially revolves around her so not surprise.
Jenna Ortega is totally wasted and the rest of the victims are generic and forgettable. The Villains meanwhile are not terribly believable, given their age and their motivation is a little off given they agreed to rent out their farmhouse to this group and then seem angry they are there. Admittedly they didn’t know they’d be shooting porn, but it still seems like their motivation is really: This is a horror film, we need to kill people.
Double Act
The only point of interest in the movie really comes from the focus on Mia Goth. The actress plays both the “Final Girl” and the primary psycho, two roles that are meant to parallel one another The only problem is the movie didn’t really need to have the same actress play that role to achieve that and doing so largely robbed the theme of it’s subtilty, while ensuring the only thing of value was Mia Goth. I can’t fault Goth’s performance though, it’s just the concept is a little on the nose.
Overall this is another clanger from West and I’m starting to wonder if his Modus Operandi is simply to make generic horror with obvious, “On the nose” themes. I will probably give “Pearl” a run next year or “House of the Devil” and see if West can finally convince me he has something to offer in the genre. If he does it’s certainly not with “X”. This is a 4/10 for me.
Marvel has lost all momentum in the cinema in recent years, so much so that some of their movies have even lost money. Everything is relevant of course and these movies are still bringing in hundreds of millions. However when your budgets reach$250m (That they admit to), you are basically looking at $600m just to break even. These are films that need the majority of the general audience to turn up to make a profit. Yet, Marvel have been putting out an increasingly niché product, that fails in broad appeal. On top of this franchises tend to suffer a delayed impact on box office from underwhelming entries. In this instance the previous MCU film, clearly made people cautious for Guardians 3.
Marvel of course is fairly unique in having sub-franchises. Two of these run largely independently from the greater MCU, namely Spider-Man and Guardians. Despite the long gap between the second and third movies there is still a strong fanbase for this franchise. What we’ve seen in the box office so far is a cautious opening weekend. This reflects a lack of faith in the MCU in general right now. The second week however had a very strong hold. My interpretation of that is that a lot of people held off until they heard the word of mouth. So is it worthy of that hold? Let’s dig in.
Synopsis (First Act Spoilers Only)
Part three part picks up a fair way after the second movie. Like many characters in the MCU, the team were heavily impacted by the Infinity War. The Gamora that was in a relationship with Quill was sacrificed by Thanos and is not coming back. However an alternative version of her from her own past has been transplanted into the modern day, rolling her back to where she started with the franchise. Quill is naturally not too happy with this and has found himself spiralling into depression.
This story actually picks up shortly after the Christmas Special, but with minimal impact. Basically just the groups new home and the revelation that Mantis is Quill’s brother.
The Guardians have settled down on Knowhere (The former base of the Collector) and renovated it into a a decent sized settlement for former Ravagers and other space misfits. Things are relatively peaceful (Outside of an increasingly drunken and mopey Starlord). That peace is disrupted by the sudden appearance of Adam Warlock. You may remember Adam as the genetically modified super being from the end of GOTG2. Warlock attacks the settlement, leading to Rocket Racoon being badly injured. As the Guardians attempt to give him medical treatment, a failsafe inside Rocket activates threatening his life. The Guardians then find themselves in a race against time to deactivate the failsafe so they can safe their friend.
Their quest brings them into conflict with The High Evolutionary, a powerful super genius whose past is heavily linked with Rocket’s. They find themselves working with another group of Ravagers, including the alterative Gamora. Neither Quill nor Gamora are especially happy with this arrangement. In classic James Gunn style, every character big and small gets their moment in the story. The downside is this pushes the run time up to a whopping two and a half hours. That gives us a lot to talk about, but don’t worry I’m keeping this as spoiler free as I can.
Villains
Let’s have a look at the move’s characters, starting with the big bad, The High Evolutionary. It’s hard not to compare Chukwudi Iwuji performance to that of Jonathan Majors as Kang. It’s a comparison that has Iwuji coming up on top… by a long way. Frankly Majors is overrated and has been over promoted.That’s understandable given how important the character is to the Phase Five. Iwuji however is severely underrated, has not really had any kind of push. Indeed he is barely in the promotional material for this film.
This is a shame, because he really nails it. He brings a sinister calmness to the role with a dangerous rage quietly bubbling under the surface. Iwuji delivers a superb performance and in my view is the best Villain the MCU has given us since Thanos. Admittedly that’s not a terribly high bar for phase 4/5 of the MCU. This is a villain you could build an entire phase around. But, Iwuji is a Gunn recruitment not a Fiege one, so this was probably never on the table. Fans of the Gunn TV series “Peacemaker” will recognise Iwuji from there and I wouldn’t be surprised to find him returning to DC in the future (In a new role).
We have a different story with Adam Warlock however, but this is a complicated one. Will Poulter is fine in the role. The problem is that Warlock feels superfluous to the entire story and has been made into yet another goofy, fish out of water “Bim-Bro” type character. Effectively he’s MCU Thor. Now fans of the comics will know that Adam Warlock is actually a great character. They will also know he was central to the entire Infinity Saga. So here he’s effectively missed his own destiny leaving him directionless. So it’s unsurprising he’s being set up as the next Thor. I fully expect his next few appearances in the MCU to involve him going off to find himself.
A character missing their own destiny isn’t new for the MCU. The Mandarin also missed his chance as Iron Man’s primary antagonist by not turning up until Tony had sacrificed himself. At least that character managed to slip into the role left by Shang-Chi’s comic book father Fu Manchu. Adam has no role to take over and it tells. It is likely only here because he was promised in the post credits scene in the previous Guardians movie. It’s impossible to know if Gunn had larger plans for him originally, but now he’s just sort of there. To be fair, he does get to kick some ass early on. For the rest of the movie though he’s just sort of hanging around. Honestly, he could have been cut entirely and the movie may have been better for it.
Heroes
So that leads us to the heroes. This is a bit of a mixed bag. As I mentioned earlier, everyone gets at least one moment to shine, but not much more. It is possibly too large a cast at this stage to do give everyone serious character arcs. Gunn’s style is somewhat similar to Joss Whedon in that the stories are heavily character based and rely on smaller moments of character banter to gradually develop the characters. The result is that many of the characters don’t develop in a significant way throughout the movie. This is a bit more realistic but not always as satisfying as a story focused approach.
Case in point Quill (Minor spoilers) doesn’t really develop much. He starts out lost and ends up trying to find himself. At this stage that is basically a generic Marvel cliché for the male characters. Drax meanwhile has his character arc sort of thrown at him late in the movie. This is very small, but is actually quite satisfying for the character and will no doubt resonate with some audience members. Nebula is just sort of there. To be fair she has gone through a lot of character development prior to the movies and the Infinity War. What we get instead with Nebula is to see just how much she has evolved since her introduction.
Alternative Gomorra has some development, but is effectively just repeating the development her other version had during the first movie. Mantis has a small amount of development, but quietly in the background and Groot is Groot. Kraglin, despite being a minor character, basically get’s an 80’s martial arts movie character arc. Just replace the special ancient technique with controlling the Yaka Arrow). Perhaps though Kragin’s real story is in his relationship to the telekinetic super-dog Cosmo. That’s one thing I’m sure all the dog lovers in the audience will get a kick out of.
Then we get to Rocket Racoon and be in no doubt this is his movie. We get to see his origins and what made his personality the way it is. Through all that, he gets a serious amount of character growth. It’s just a shame that the set up to all this actually eliminates the popular character from the majority of the movie. Despite this it is an emotional journey for him and the audience. If you are a fan of Rocket Racoon, expect it to be both frustrating and emotional.
And the Plot?
Story wise, I have issues and this really reflects how much of a character based writer Gunn is. The first point of note is the often self defeating actions of the antagonists. On several occasions the villains do things that seem to sabotage themselves for no readily apparent reason other than to drive the plot forward. This wouldn’t be so bad, if those errors of judgement weren’t the driving force for the majority of the movie. The film is very lucky to have such a capable actor as it’s main villain, since his performance can at least in the moment let you ignore all that. Hard not to question it after though.
A big issue for the movie is it’s length. There is a lot of debate to be had on whether the inclusion of either Adam Warlock or Gomorra was really necessary for the movie. The truth is they are both there just because they were expected to be there. Gomorra is there because she was a key character in the first two movies and that’s it. There is some purpose for her though in showing how circumstance can change where someone ends up, but doesn’t change who they are at heart. It’s a nice sentiment, but wasn’t really needed to conclude the story.
Adam Warlock is perhaps the films biggest issue since his presence seems to damage both the movie and the character. The truth is he wasn’t needed for the film and had he not been revealed in the post credit scene after Guardians 2, he probably wouldn’t have been in it. Removing either him or Gamora would probably have reduced the films run time by a good 15 minutes without any real impact. There was also a random scene involving giant space monsters that basically don’t do anything, making the entire section superfluous. Removing all of that would probably have had the runtime down to a solid 1 hour 50. Just about perfect for a superhero movie.
That said, the movie doesn’t drag much. It is basically split into three very distinct acts, each with their own build up, major action scene and wind down. The format kept me interested and each section had it’s positives and negatives. They movie is packed with references and cameos too, which while not something that helps the overall quality. It does add a little bit of fun on the first viewing though, and some talking points. Naturally the cameos include yet another appearance from Howard the Duck, but we’re also treated to a brief appearance of Sylvester Stallone, reprising his role of Stakar Ogord from the second film.
Mix Tape Vol. 3
That brings us to the final element we all expect from a Guardians movie: The music. Well… yeah, it’s not that great this time out. It’s not that the music is itself bad, it’s just not quite up to the level of the previous movies and when the music has been so good previously, you notice the drop off. Some of the choices are quite strange too, for example Alice Cooper’s version of “I’m Always Chasing Rainbows”. That is far from Alice’s best track and the song itself is a cover, with the original being over a hundred years old.
I can’t help but wonder if the music clearance budget for the film was slashed this time or if Gunn simply chose to keep back the really good tracks so he can make use of them in his upcoming DC movies. Gunn has good taste in music, but his choices are usually pretty big hits from their era/genre. Not obscure gems such as the ones Tarantino tends to dig up. I imagine there is a limit to how many good tracks he can dig up. Perhaps he didn’t want to waste his best ones at a company he is departing? Who knows. Either way, the soundtrack is the least memorable of the series. It’s not actually bad however, it’s just not a selling point like it was for the previous films.
Assessment
As a critic, I have to be critical. But despite all that I want to be clear, I had a lot of fun with this movie. Despite the flaws and the step down in some regards from the previous movies this was an emotionally satisfying movie with fun action scenes and some good humour. The length didn’t damage my enjoyment, at least not on the first viewing (Remains to be seen how I feel in the years to come) and while I didn’t leave the theatre humming any of the tunes I wasn’t putting my fingers in my ears either. The story focus on Rocket definitely works and the villain is the best MCU villain since Thanos.
That said, we don’t have a very high bar in regard to villains in the MCU and even when Marvel was more consistently good, the villains were rarely the selling point. They really need to nail that Doctor Doom casting if the MCU is to have any hope going forward. This was a final chapter for the Guardians and it may be a final chapter for many’s journey with the MCU, but the good news is it’s a pretty satisfying ending. If you were to watch Phase 1-3 and follow that up with just Spider-Man No Way Home and then this you would feel pretty content with your journey. This movie is a strong 6.5/10 and a hairs width short of a 7.
VERDICT: 6.5/10 – Recommended, especially to fans of the previous movies.
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Rating: 6.5 out of 10.
Bonus Round – The State of the MCU
With this movie and Gunn’s departure it seems certain this is the end of the Guardians as we know them. Sure Disney still owns the rights, but without Gunn, it won’t be the same and many of the actors will not want to return. On top of this there is no announced Spider-Man film suggesting that Sony may be pulling out of their deal with Disney. Things look bad for the MCU. This of course follows the departure of Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Natasha Romanov, T’Challa and probably Thor. The MCU desperately needs to bring in some top name draws again to prop up the smaller sub-franchises, but there is no sign of this happening any time soon because of Kevin Feige’s stubborn refusal to change his plans for Phase 4-6 despite the Fox purchase.
The comic book giants of The Fantastic Four, The X-Men and huge names like Doom and Wolverine have just been sitting on the shelf while Marvel rolls out it’s E, F and J list heroes. I’m not kidding with that either, there are definite tiers for Superheroes, the A list for Marvel is just Spider-Man. The B-List are Hulk, X-Men and until a string of failed movies downgraded them, The Fantastic Four, then you have Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Wolverine and Magneto/Prof-X as the C-List. That was the level on which the MCU was built. Blade, Daredevil, Ghost Rider and maybe She-Hulk and a few of the X-Men as individuals are the D-List level. The rest, including Ant Man and The Guardians would have been E-List or lower, which shows you can make it work on an individual basis, but you need some bigger names for the larger franchise.
The Downward Spiral
The problem with using the lower tier heroes is you need someone with real talent and creativity to make it work. They had that with James Gunn and now he is gone and Marvel don’t have anyone else that can pull that kind of thing off. With budgets increasing and returns decreasing, each new Marvel movie represents an increasing poor ratio of risk to reward. Ant Man Quantumania lost money, Guardians 3 will likely only generate the same profit level as a successful Horror (About $100m in profit), but Horror does it on about a tenth of the budget of a Superhero movie, so far less risk. The next three movies Marvel has on it’s slate may struggle to even achieve Ant Man numbers and when they finally get to Blade, it most likely will be back in that Horror film profit range (But with a Superhero film cost).
Logic would suggest Disney needs to radically slow down on the number of Marvel movies it puts out and focus on the bigger B and C list names, leaving the D and E list to the TV shows and relegate the rest to supporting characters for now (Until they can find a new Gunn or Whedon and even then probably best to focus on the teams instead of individuals at that level). It’s worth noting that the original plan was probably for Phase Four to cash in on the momentum from the Infinity Saga, bringing in the expectedly large audiences by default for those lower tier characters. But Covid struck and by the time they could get any of those titles out, the momentum was gone. Still, the failure to find a pivot to a new plan is entirely on Feige.
Meanwhile at DC…
But as one door closes another opens and a new chapter begins over at Warner/DC. James Gunn has a vision, it remains to be seen if that vision is any good but chances are it will be better than what Warner has been doing for the last decade (Aside from the excellent Joker movie of course). Before we get there though, we have to find a path through the last remnants of the older regimes. Namely we need to get past the Ezra Miller Flash film and Jason Momoa’s likely final appearance as Aquaman. Momoa is probably not going anywhere, but if rumours are true may be switching roles to one he is better suited for, namely Lobo. Miller meanwhile is almost certainly gone after The Flash, yet his movie is the pivot on which the old DCEU morphs into Gunn’s new DCU.
The new era truly begins with “Superman:Legacy”, a film that will make or break DC in the coming years. But even if it turns out to be a good film, it could be a case of too little, too late for Warner to properly cash in on the Superhero fever of the last decade. Superhero fatigue may well be a thing. We will have to wait and see. At the time of writing, though Gunn has announced a slate of films, he hasn’t cast anyone for them yet and we are a long way away from seeing trailers. Who knows where he goes from here. Chances are though, as someone that likes to work with the same people we may well see the actors behind the Guardians turning up in DC. Karren Gillan has already suggested she’d like to play Poison Ivy for instance. Sounds good to me.
You must be logged in to post a comment.