2010s, 2014, F, Grade, Horror, mystery, Review, review-movie, supernatural, Thriller, Year

Review: Ouija

Leave a comment
Director(s)Stiles White
Principal CastOlivia Cooke as Laine
Afra Sophia Tully as young Laine
Shelley Hennig as Debbie
Claire Beale as young Debbie
Ana Coto as Sarah
Izzie Galanti as young Sarah
Release Date2014
Language(s)English
Running Time 89 minutes

Unlike most people who had to suffer through Ouija’s theatrical run, I came into the movie after having seen the MUCH better sequel-prequel Oujia: Origin of Evil. I loved that movie up till the last 20ish minutes and couldn’t fathom how strange this section felt in comparison to the rest of the movie. I thought if I watched the original movie, it’d help make sense of where Flanagan’s sequel-prequel needed to go, given that his conclusion had to be able to lead into the beginning of this. After watching Oujia, all I can say is Mike Flanagan deserves serious recognition for even attempting at fleshing out a backstory for this horror aberration. Oujia is painfully slow, packed to the brim with cliches and cheap scares, and constantly undermines its own rules and setup culminating in one of the least satisfying horror blockbusters in recent years.

If you’ve read my reviews before, you know I love slow burn horror movies. However, that’s only if they’re done well. If a director is going to make me wait, there needs to be a huge spectacular visceral payoff or a poignant thematic resolution. Unfortunately, Ouija has neither and only ever manages to do the bare minimum to elicit scares. From the moment the movie started, I knew something was off. There’s a prologue/flashback of two young girls, Laine and Debbie, playing with a spirit board. After this the story goes to “present” day and the way the transition happens makes it obvious that Debbie is one of the girls from the flashback. There’s no tension or mystery about what the flashback meant which makes its presence just feel unnecessary. After meeting with Laine in, Debbie “kills” herself after being possessed. Laine, in her desperation to figure out what happened, tries to use a ouija board with a group of mutual friends to contact the deceased Debbie. Unfortunately, just like the first two scenes, what follows is a movie that feels empty and unexplained.

It always feels like there are weird exposition dumps instead of attempts at naturally developing the story. Information is always revealed at the most convenient times by characters the movie never wants to flesh out. For example, Laine’s grandmother appears early on to help Laine deal with her grief over Debbie’s death but randomly exhibits a profound knowledge of the occult in later scenes exactly when her granddaughter needs advice. I feel like these character traits could have been hinted at earlier and better integrated with the story, but instead of that, they’re haphazardly shoved in to keep the story going to the next telegraphed scare. At some point I felt like I was just watching generic scares from a grab-bag of supernatural horror scenes, tacked together with a contrived and emotionally vacuous plot. There’s never a reason to care about any of the characters. The inciting incident for the movie is never explained in a way that makes you care. Scares have no overarching purpose tying them together and don’t accomplish anything thematically. The worst part is they rarely made me feel anything, let alone fearful of some supernatural entity. The movie sets up that the spirit can only act in certain ways to create a sense of tension, but actively breaks those rules at every moment so there’s never a reason to think the supernatural presence is threatening.

The only redeeming part of this movie is Lin Shaye’s performance. I won’t spoil what her role is because it’s relevant to latter portions of the story, but the moment I saw her, both in my initial watch and re-watch, I felt like I cared about what was happening. She doesn’t get a lot of on-screen time, but she absolutely gives the movie a much needed pulse when she does show up. With her performance in this and The Grudge, I’m convinced you can chuck her in any horror movie and have at least some good moments. Unfortunately, everyone else in the movie came off anywhere from outright unbelievable to kind-of passable. There are definitely some “emotional” moments that feel like first takes that were just given the thumbs up with no attempts at revision.

REPORT CARD

TLDROuija is as boring as it is contrived. The story is slow,boring, and never manages to deliver effective surprises because it undermines it supernatural set-up at every point. Outside of a great performance from Lin Shaye, there’s nothing here, even for ardent lovers of the supernatural genre.
Rating3.2/10
GradeF

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3
2010s, 2019, A, Drama, Grade, Horror, psychological, Review, review-movie, Thriller, Year

Review: The Lodge

Leave a comment
Director(s)Veronika Franz
Severin Fiala
Principal CastRiley Keough as Grace
Jaeden Martell as Aidan
Lia McHugh as Mia
Richard Armitage as Richard
Release Date2019
Language(s)English
Running Time 108 minutes

The moment I saw the trailer for this movie and realized that Franz and Fiala were attached to the project , I waited with baited breath till the movie came to my area (which thankfully it did). Though it doesn’t reach the same heights as the duo’s debut feature, Goodnight Mommy, it’s still a standout in a sea of boring and uninspired horrors. The Lodge may fumble with the logic of some its grander narrative decisions, but it more than makes up for that with the dark,twisted offerings it has in store.

The movie follows a family on retreat to a winter cabin. When work events come up, the father, Richard, is forced to leave his children alone with his new girlfriend, Grace. There’s an immediate tension between the two parties as Grace tries to be amicable with her partner’s children who seem to want nothing to do with her. After a blizzard strands the party in the cabin, things start going bump in the night and Grace is forced to deal with the unpredictable and tumultuous state of affairs. Based on the first 10 minutes of the movie, which are absolutely shocking, I knew I was in for a brutal experience.

Unlike their first movie, this one revels in teasing the audience with what’s really going on. There’s deception and layers to deception that’ll have you constantly questioning what’s happening. I came in with some initial ideas and then was hit with switch-ups that I genuinely did not see coming. It culminates in some of the most twisted stuff I’ve seen on the big screen in a long time. This is not the movie you want to see if you’re trying to have a good time or forget about the worries of your day. The story is dark and explores the deepest, most intimate parts of the human condition. It focuses on grief, depression, and heaping doses of internalized resentment and how those elements disrupt and warp our ability to properly evaluate the proper course of action. That being said, the way certain twists are executed border on neigh unbelievable given the information the audience is presented. In their attempt to create twists that are impossible to predict, Franz and Fiala are forced to really stretch logic in ways that’ll have sticklers for rules in movies feeling frustrated. This is a story driven movie with interesting characters that’s more focused on getting to the shocking thematic and viscerally unpleasant scenes than developing the underlying logic as to why those things are happening in the first place.

While the characters aren’t as developed as I would have liked, the performances of the actors playing them are refined and accentuate the tension and uncomfortable nature of the situation. Both Martell and McHugh manage to show their disdain for their dad’s new lover in their own unique and petty ways, from the silent treatment to the mean side-eye. Their obvious care and affection for one another leaps off the screen and it’s completely believable that they’re siblings struggling to find their footing in the world. Likewise, Keough manages to portray the range of emotions any desperate person would do trying to impress their partner’s kids going from enthusiastic to laid back to assertive. At the same time, she shows the cracks in her psyche as the blizzard and her isolation continue. Given the nature of the twists ,the twists within twists, and so on, it’s even more impressive just how well everyone managed to keep the nature of the mystery under wraps until just the right moment.

Unfortunately, despite being stylish and packed with scenes I won’t be able to get out of my head for the foreseeable future, one of the movie’s bigger reveals feels like it comes out of left field. I don’t want to spoil anything because the movie should be seen with absolutely no knowledge of any of the mystery, but I think the way everything pans out feels undeserved at some level. If the movie spent another 10-15 minutes developing character backgrounds, tightening up the references to Christianity, and making better use of a dollhouse set that’s used to transition between scenes it would’ve been up there with some of very best. The elements are all there. It’s just that they’re not meshing all the way through.

REPORT CARD

TLDRThe Lodge is as dark as it is twisted in its depiction of how grief and hatred warp our perception of the world. The story of a new girlfriend trying to get her partner’s kids to open up to her goes places you won’t be able to un-see and will manage to chill you even if the setup feels over-the-top at times.
Rating9.0/10
Grade A

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3
2015, A+, Grade, Horror, mystery, Review, review-movie, Thriller, Year

Review: Goodnight Mommy

Leave a comment
Director(s)Veronika Franz
Severin Fiala
Principal CastElias Shcwarz as Elias
Lukas Schwarz as Lukas
Susanne Wuest as the Mother
Release Date2014
Language(s)German
Running Time 100 minutes

After I saw the trailer for this movie back in 2015, I knew I had to watch it. The trailer by itself has everything you’d want in a movie: evocative and eerie imagery, unnerving music, and a general sense of dread. When I first watched the movie I was super into it but felt like it showed its hand a bit too early. However, on subsequent watches I think the decision made make the entire piece unified in what it’s trying to convey, even if it takes out some of the ambiguity I’d have wanted.

The story starts off with an interesting enough premise; a pair of twin brothers, Elias and Lukas, grow suspicious of their mother’s identity after she exhibits eccentric behavior post facial reconstruction surgery. The way the mystery builds up is interesting in how it’s predicated on what’s not being shown on screen more so than hints and cues from what is being shown. This is a story that seems like it’s obvious, but upon closer inspection the obvious clues are left to invite more thought about background affairs. It gives the original mystery at the heart of the movie a kick that’ll have you coming back to watch over and over again. The first time I saw the movie, I was surprised at how much my allegiances to each character shifted and changed. This is in spite of “figuring out” what the movie was about.

Everything only works because of how well the family dynamic is set up and acted by the principal cast. Wuest exudes ambiguity and enables the first level of mystery- whether or not she really is the pair’s mother- to operate seamlessly. I have my own interpretation, but the way that she responds to certain sequences is commendable. One of the more apparent twists in the movie wouldn’t work without her ability to effortlessly sell her character’s perspective. Likewise, both Elias and Lukas bring life to the twins they play and the suspicions the duo have. You can feel the love the two have for each other. They practically feel like one unit, connected at the hip. Their response to the increasingly uncertain circumstance is not only justified, but done in a way that makes you forget you’re watching child actors as opposed to children going through a terrifying,mysterious situation. The dynamic between the whole unit feels authentic and dripping with tension and ambiguity which makes the hellscape the movie turns into that much more impactful.

At the heart of the mystery is a tale about trauma, it’s role in shaping our identity, and the way those fractures affect our ability to gauge and interact with the world. We spend time with both sets of characters, the mother and the boys, in isolation dealing with their own agendas and issues. Their interactions together compliment what we know and paints a whole picture of both sets. Each twist in the story adds a layer to that discussion and it culminates in an jarring but resonant way. The movie does a great job visualizing these ideas in the scares. From the abstract nightmare sequences to the very real visceral moments of violence, the movie never lets up with ramping up the terror. There’s more than one moment that had me watching everything from behind the slits between my fingers.

While I love the way the movie approaches most of its elements, I think its use of ambiguity is uneven. There are certain character decisions that I think are great and manage to work at every level of the story, but then other decisions only manage to fulfill one level while missing the mark elsewhere. For example, there are moments that had me going “No way. X should’ve done Y at an earlier point.” Yes, technically X being done at a certain moment is fine and works at a thematic level, but it hurts the movie from a realism level. Thankfully the theme and story work so well that I could forget some of the incongruities and “what about” moments, but hardcore sticklers for movie logic might not be as forgiving.

REPORT CARD

TLDRThere’s more than meets the eye in this story of two boys trying to figure out if their mother is really who she says she is. Goodnight Mommy‘s balances visceral scares with a deep dive on the way trauma affects our identity and relationship with others. If you’ve seen it and thought it showed its hand too early, watch it again and focus on what’s not being said. You may find something more to appreciate in this thought provoking gem.
Rating9.5/10
Grade A+

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3
2010s, 2015, A, Drama, Grade, Horror, mystery, Review, review-movie, Thriller, Year

Review: The Invitation

Leave a comment
Director(s)Karyn Kusama
Principal CastLogan Marshall-Green as Will
Tammy Blanchard as Eden
Michiel Huisman as David
Emayatzy Corinealdi as Kira
Release Date2015
Language(s)English
Running Time 100 minutes

As someone who enjoyed Jennifer’s Body quite a lot on release, I was excited when I saw that the director, Karyn Kusama, was making another horror movie, The Invitation, and eagerly waited for it to get a wider release. I thought the movie was interesting the first time, but felt slightly let down by the time the mystery at the heart of the story was fully revealed. However, on subsequent watches I’ve come to appreciate just how meticulous the twists and turns of the story are hidden and revealed and genuinely love the way the whole thing plays out.

The story follows Will and Kira, a couple on their way to visit Will’s ex-wife, Eden, at the former couple’s old house. Immediately, the story feels off. The idea of an ex inviting their former lover and respective partner just feels strange and the story makes that feeling pronounced before we even get to the house. When Will and Kira arrive, the former is greeted by a host of familiar faces and it’s clear that there’s a lot of shared history between the people present. As initial conversations play out, it’s made apparent that the group split apart due to some traumatic event and the night is a kind of reconciliation of sorts. Except something is wrong. Or maybe nothing is wrong.

The movie takes its sweet time getting to the answers and prefers to steep in mystery and misdirection. There are multiple scenes where instinctively it feels like something is horribly off. You can feel the horror set-up, but the movie never gives you the satisfaction of letting you know if the set up was obvious on purpose to misdirect or if it’s the cliche proper. The ambiguity never lets up. This mystery is made more immersive because Will, our protagonist and main point of contact, shares the exact same concerns. It’s almost like he’s watched horror movies and gets antsy in the situations we’re nervous in. We don’t need to scream at the characters, when a character in the movie is willing to do it for us. Except it’s made apparent early on that Will may not be as reliable as we’d hope. The use of dream sequences, cuts from the past to reality, and the constant juxtaposition of Will’s uneasiness with the rest of the group’s general lax and nonchalant attitude to the situations presented had me questioning if I was the crazy one for relating to him.

This is a movie about survival in more ways than one. Given the circumstances leading to the fated gathering, it’s not hard to imagine that certain parties would be nervous about attending, especially Will. As certain moments unfold, that suspicion gets stronger. However, just like most of us are taught in real life, the characters politely disregard stranger moments in favor of maintaining social unity. If nothing’s too off, then it’s okay to acquiesce to some oddities to keep the peace. The question is just how odd to let things get before acting. Has society made us so fearful that we take even innocent actions as suspicious enough to pull the trigger on or are we so polite that we’d let people get away with blatantly problematic behavior without ever butting in? Both sides are real and something a lot of us have had to deal with. The movie toes the line between the concepts in a way that’s somehow tense in the moment but poetic to think about.

Despite being a movie mainly about a series of conversations, the movie never feels boring or uninteresting. The off-putting characters are strange enough to make you look twice but never do anything to verify suspicions. The more relatable characters constantly ease and mellow out suspicions, even if their outlook on events feels a bit absurd at times. It adds up to a slow, atmospheric mystery that builds to a sudden reveal at which point the movie goes at a breakneck pace to a stunning, well-earned conclusion.

REPORT CARD

TLDRThe Invitation is a mystery that doesn’t stop surprising till its very end. You know the story of a man and his girlfriend being invited to his ex-wife’s (and his former) house for a shindig after a traumatic event left the couple and their friends devastated is going to deliver something different, but the movie excels in making you ask what that is. The movie’s discussion of survival in relation to trauma and suspicion is interesting and has only become more relevant in our increasingly diverse society. If you can handle a long build-up and enjoy atmospheric horrors, this is for you.
Rating9.3/10
Grade A

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3
2000s, 2009, A, Black-Comedy, Comedy, Grade, Review, review-movie, supernatural, Year

Review: Jennifer’s Body

Leave a comment
Director(s)Karyn Kusama
Principal CastMegan Fox as Jennifer
Amanda Seyfried as Needy
Johny Simmons as Chip
Release Date2009
Language(s)English
Running Time 102 minutes

When this movie first came out over a decade ago, I thought it was going to be some schlocky exploitative film based on the advertising. Watching the movie proved to be a completely different experience and I remember feeling pretty satisfied with what I saw. As you can imagine I was shocked when I saw the low Rotten Tomatoes score. Thankfully, after a recent re-watch, I’m proud to say my love for the movie has only appreciated over the years and I’m confident that if it came out today, it’d probably end up doing great. At least I hope it would. If anything this is more proof that the Tomato Meter only matters if you let it matter.

Needy, a reticent nerd, realizes that her super popular BFF, Jennifer, has transformed into a man-eating succubus, and desperately tries to stop her carnivorous ways. The movie picks up on Needy in a mental institution, explaining the events of Jennifer’s possession and her subsequent rampage. This framing mechanism gives the story a sense of mystery and allows for some fun “breaking the 4th wall” moments. Needy is so bad ass and resolute in this “current” timeline and so reserved and shy in the story she narrates. You want to why and she tells you in an incredibly entertaining way. The way the framing mechanism bookends certain moments makes it clear the story is focused on Needy’s journey, not her destination. Once the movie “ends” you appreciate the way the whole story was structured a lot more.

Despite being a horror movie and containing some genuinely chilling moments to experience and think about, the movie stands in out in just how funny it is. Yes, there’s a few moments where the humor and horror clash, but I think for the most part the two elements accentuate one another. The movie has a good blend of parodies of cliched young adult humor and some genuinely dark humor with a distinct feminist blend. I found myself laughing at the more obvious jokes while appreciating the more subtle-not-so-subtle social commentary.

The idea of stopping a succubus isn’t new, but the movie mainly utilizes its supernatural aspect to navigate a litany of (especially at the time of the movie’s release) unexplored ideas as opposed to just playing it cool as a creature feature. Somehow the story explores toxicity in relationships, the way women are stripped of agency and forced to play disparate social roles, and the way tragedy is exploited. The small town setting is taken full advantage of to make these ideas even more pronounced.

Fox kills it as the lead. She feels like a caricature of what people actually thought/think about her and nails the air-headed, egotistical, narcissistic pretty girl archetype. After her transformation into bloodthirsty succubus, she manages to ramp her annoying qualities up a notch which lends to some genuinely funny moments. Seyfried is great as the nerdy shy friend who’s slowly forced into becoming more proactive as things get more and more out of control. The energy they give off is infectious and jumps off the screen.

At a surface level, the two have almost nothing in common with the former acting in service of the latter since their childhood. It’s a relatable relationship dynamic that I haven’t seen explored a lot, let alone in such depth and nuance. They may be “BFFs”, but as the film progresses the parameters of what that relationship really means and entails become clear, faults and all. The romantic tension between them is also teased and stretched in ways that not only feels well justified thematically but feels natural and for the most part non-exploitative. Their respective interactions juxtaposed with the almost nonchalant indifference Jennifer treats her victims with gives you a lot to think about and does a good job humanizing our monster in disguise. Yes, there’s a few sexually charged scenes, but the movie’s focus is on the relationship underneath the physical exchange, not the exchange itself.

While I love how Needy and Jennifer’s relationship is explored, certain supernatural elements of it feel unjustified/contrived. These moments feel like they exist just to create certain confrontations to push the story forward as opposed to naturally occurring plot events. Additionally, some side characters feel a bit too comical and one-note, so they stand out in contrast to the more well realized main characters. These problems never de

REPORT CARD

TLDRJennifer’s Body tells the story of a girl desperate to stop her former best friend turned succubus from terrorizing the men of their small town. Somehow this highly slept on blend of horror, comedy, and dark humor manages to be even more socially relevant today than back in 2009 when it was released. Don’t let the trailers fool you. There’s more than meets the eye in this unapologetically fun movie.
Rating9.1/10
Grade A

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3
2019, A+, Drama, Grade, Review, review-movie, romance, Year

Review: Portrait of a Lady on Fire

Leave a comment
Director(s)Céline Sciamma
Principal CastNoémie Merlant as Marianne
Adèle Haenel as Heloise
Luàna Bajrami as Sophie
Release Date2019
Language(s)French
Running Time 120 minutes

Marianne, a young painter, is hired to paint the portrait of Heloise, a member of the French aristocracy for the latter’s future husband to be. The catch? She has to do it in secret without Heloise finding out because the not-so-blushing bride to be has no desire to get married. As a result she’s hired on as a companion and is forced to steal glances at her subject and commit them to memory in an effort to paint them later. What follows is a forbidden romance as the our two leading ladies guide us through a discussion of art, the relationship of the painter vs the subject, love, desire, and the functions of our gaze. It’s one of the most touching love stories I’ve had the pleasure of watching and I haven’t been able to stop thinking about it since I saw it last night.

The movie is slow and deliberately paced to give every moment importance. Dialogue is slow and deliberate. Often times our leading ladies talks slowly and meticulously, accentuating the importance of the few lines of spoken dialogue that happen throughout the film. Most times conversation takes place through the series of gazes. Early on Marianne has to take note of Heloise’s features without coming off as too obvious. Meanwhile, the Heloise steals glances of the the painter-in-disguise when she’s looking away. As the relationship progresses so does the nature of the gaze. It’s genuinely amazing just how much of the story can be felt and told in this way. Both Merlant and Haenel knock it out of the park in how well they manage to convey their thoughts and emotions in their eyes. You can tell exactly what wavelength they’re on emotionally, independently, and as a couple growing more deeply in love. The desire inherent in what they’re looking at tells the real story of what’s happening between the two. Their chemistry radiates off the screen and the build-up to more crucial moments is well worth the long wait time.

On top of being rich from a narrative standpoint, the movie is packed to the brim with interesting themes. At one level the movie is about the relationship between the painter and their subject. Usually when we think of art, we think of the artist rendering the subject into a piece of art. The subject is stripped of agency and becomes an object to be transformed. However, as the painter glances at the subject, the subject glances back at the painter and a similar kind of understanding is created. At another level the movie is a profound critique of the way women are forced into social positions where their desire is redirected against their will and offers methods of overcoming those situations in realistic ways. The way that these ideas mix together in relation to each other and to the nature of a forbidden romance is touching and has given more than enough to think about. The brilliance of the movie is how each of these moments is seamlessly layered into the larger tapestry of the movie in a way that flows with the story.

Finally, as if you needed another reason, this is one of the prettiest movies I’ve ever seen. Every shot is bursting with color and the color palette on display is vibrant and highly distinct. The movie’s never boring to look at and as the island the characters are on is traversed more, the changes in scenery keep every moment feeling fresh. Every single detail is visible up to the strands of saliva that remain post kiss. If that isn’t high fidelity I don’t know what is. The way that certain shots are blocked and positioned are both visceral and thematic. My jaw dropped more than one time at the sheer artistry of certain frames. Music is used sparsely so you’re completely immersed into the scene and what the character’s are doing. When it does come into play, and believe me it does, it only exists as a kind of bow on top of a perfect present. It somehow seals the whole movie together into a pristine package.

REPORT CARD

TLDRA Portrait of a Lady on Fire’s ingenious premise of a painter forced to paint a subject without letting them know is explored to its fullest in this queer, French, period piece that’s packed to the brim with some of 2019’s best cinematography. The way the movie tackles desire, the gaze, love, women’s social positions, art, and the relation of painters and their subjects somehow gives each topic justice while melding them together into a one of a kind experience that you shouldn’t miss. Please do yourself the service of watching this.
Rating10/10
Grade A+

Go to Page 2 to view this review’s progress report.

Pages: 1 2
2020, 2020s, A+, Grade, Horror, mystery, Review, review-movie, Science Fiction, science fiction horror, Thriller, Year

Review: The Invisible Man (2020)

2 Comments
Director(s)Leigh Whannell
Principal CastElisabeth Moss as Cecilia
Oliver Jackson-Cohen as Adrian
Aldis Hodge as Detective James
Harriet Dyer as Emily
Storm Reid as Sydney
Release Date2020
Language(s)English
Running Time 124 minutes

Leigh Whannell has never made a movie I haven’t enjoyed either as a screenwriter or director. The Insidious series is one of my favorite horror franchises and wouldn’t have been possible without him. 2018’s Upgrade made me appreciate how well he could move behind the camera and I was hyped up to see what he was going to do next. Then I saw the trailers for his latest feature, a remake of the iconic The Invisible Man. I’ll be honest when I say that I didn’t have faith the movie would be good. I thought the trailer spoiled too much and I thought the movie would be schlocky or boring as a result. If it wasn’t for my love of Whannell’s past works I would’ve given this a sit-out till reviews came out, like I did for Fantasy Island . Thankfully, I ended up seeing this opening night and left the theater blown away. Whanell has taken the core components of H.G Well’s beloved story and fitted them into a #MeToo movie that’s topical and nuanced without being patronizing.

The story follows Cecilia, an abused women who decides enough is enough and attempts to escape from her controlling and manipulative husband. Despite knowing that she’d escape based off the trailers , I still felt my knuckles clench during the opening sequence. It is pin drop silent as Emily Moss tip toes around the mansion that serves as her castle. You can feel her tension in every action, in every moment, in every hurried look around her settings to make sure that her husband isn’t near. Thankfully for the audience, it’s only an appetizer for what’s to come. After she manages to get out of the situation, she receives the news that her husband has apparently died from suicide and has left her a huge sum in his will. Soon after this, she settles into an apparently peaceful life, that is, until she realizes that her husband may not be dead and instead might be stalking her as an invisible man.

Whannell gets what makes invisibility scary and manages to push the concept in new, bold ways. There are moments where the camera pans from a character to a supposedly empty area. It lingers there almost hinting that the invisible assailant is in the same space. It’s almost like Whannell is taunting you to pick out where the man is. Sometimes there’s a discernible sign something is there. Other times there’s nothing. I felt myself becoming more paranoid and off kilter as I desperately tried to find him in the frame. It’s brilliant move that places you in Cecilia’s frame of mind. Once she realizes she’s being stalked, no space is a safe space. Any space could house “him” in it and she constantly has to be on high alert at all times. The ingenuity of panning to different kids of empty settings is we’re never made aware if the titular antagonist is actually there. We, the audience and Cecilia, might just be staring at nothing, scaring ourselves at the idea of what’s there. It creates an immersive atmosphere that should pull anyone in , regardless of gender or sex.

What gives the movie it’s unique subtext is also one of the main differences between it and the 1933 original- the focus on the perspective of the victim and not the assailant. We follow Cecilia the whole movie, so the fear of being pursued by an invisible assailant feels more personal as opposed to detached. There’s a stronger sense of culpability which makes us even more sympathetic of the main character’s plight. That’s why it feels so frustrating to see her rebuffed at every opportunity. Of course it would sound crazy to talk about how you’re being stalked by your invisible dead husband. Even when the malevolent entity is literally in the room invading her space and psyche, no one believes her. It’s a poignant #MeToo call , as Cecilia desperately tries to get anyone to believe her abuse and help her. The fear of losing ones mind from constant gaslighting compliments and accentuates the fear of invisibility. It gives the movie layers of textured horror.

At the heart of all of this is Elisabeth Moss’s performance as Cecilia. Holy shit. Moss is asked to do so much this movie and delivers on all fronts. Early on when she’s just escaping, she nails the dread and anxiety of leaving her abuser. The uncertainty of her precautions working shows in her face and her constant glances. When she thinks her husband is dead you can see her body language change. Her face brightens and you can feel the hope set in, which is why when she realizes that he may not be as dead as everyone says, it hurts. You can see the confidence tear as it’s replaced by anxiety and paranoia again. The fatigue, the weariness, the feeling of being absolutely done; it’s all there. There are huge scenes where she’s literally talking to nothing visible in the room, but you feel like someone else is there, because maybe there is. When she starts to fight back, you can feel the fight or flight in her desperation and/or her tenacity. She’s the emotional core of the movie and without such an amazing performance, the story would fail to be as effective of compelling.

There are a few story issues that threaten the underlying logic of the movie, but I didn’t notice them in the moment. Some of them feel like more serious realism issues . Others are more nitpicky. However, none of them detracted from my enjoyment or from the story in a meaningful way. If you’re someone who can’t turn the “but how could they even” part of your brain off, you might get frustrated with some of thriller sequences in the second act. Thankfully, I was able to ignore that inner voice and just let myself be transported into Whannell’s world.

Report Card

TLDRThe Invisible Man knocks it out of the park. It captures the essential ideas of the original movie, but manages to make them more topical for our day and age. The story of an abused wife being stalked by her supposedly dead, abusive husband manages to surprise more than the trailers would let on. Whannell manages to deliver some well earned scares alongside an incredibly relevant message in the #MeToo era.
Rating9.5/10
GradeA+

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

 

Pages: 1 2 3
1930s, 1933, A+, Comedy, Grade, Horror, Review, review-movie, Science Fiction, science fiction horror, Year

Review: The Invisible Man (1933)

Leave a comment
Director(s)James Whale
Principal CastClaude Rains as Dr. Griffin/The Invisible Man
William Harrigan as Dr. Kemp
Henry Travers as Dr. Cranley
Gloria Stuart as Flora Cranley
Release Date1933
Language(s)English
Running Time 71 minutes

I decided to watch the original 1933 release of The Invisible Man to get ready for Leigh Whannell’s reboot of the same. As someone who’s read the original book by H.G. Wells I knew what to expect but was still pleasantly surprised at how well Whale managed to capture the spirit of the book and make it come to life on the big screen. The story follows Dr.Griffin, a scientist who finds himself invisible after an experiment goes wrong. Unbeknownst to him his invisibility concoction triggers madness and aggression, causing him to engage in some hilarious, but heinous moments of violence. As his condition progresses, his colleagues seek to contain him before he can do any more harm.

For the most part the story follows the beats of the book pretty well, so if you like the book you should like the movie. However, the motivation for Griffin’s experiments are changed in this adaptation to give the story a more compact theme and sense of relatability. I think the change works and makes the interactions between Griffin and his former acquaintances more interesting. It also gives the story more of a cautionary tale vibe. The pursuit of knowledge for any end must be counterbalanced by caution and restrain. Otherwise it can end up undoing what it was sought out to help deal with. It’s something all of us can end up learning from.

Despite being a movie from 1933, the movie never feels like its age . John Fulton, John Mescall, and Frank Williams make the titular invisible man really feel as he should. When Griffin takes off his clothes, only the areas without anything to cover them are see through. The transition from clothing to nothing is near seamless and I can only imagine how much fun this must have been to see in theaters back when it came out. Granted, the effects only feel as held together as they do because of Claude Rains’s performance. He manages to portray the madness of a man who can no longer be seen purely through the emotional range in his voice or from the very physical and intimidating presence he gives his movement. He may not be visible in the traditional sense, but it seems like he didn’t get the memo, because he absolutely owns the screen when he’s on the big screen.

The most surprising fact is Whale manages to do all of this in a mere 77 minutes. There’s mystery, comedy, romance, and horror and no element ever takes away from another. They all work in tandem to keep the story fresh and interesting from start to finish. There’s always a sense of progression and growth. Characters change in their decision making and it’s reflected in the way scenes play out. For example, early on when townspeople come after the Griffin, it’s almost comical. He mocks and messes with the disorganized group and it feels like child’s play. Later on when his pursuers realize what they’re dealing with, their approach becomes more defined and serious. Details like this make the whole piece feel organic.

REPORT CARD

TLDRThe Invisible Man is a classic for a reason. Whale’s managed to capture what makes H.G. Well’s novella so resonant, while making it more relatable to a mainstream audience. From the immaculate pacing to the genuinely surprising special effects, this story of a scientist maddened by invisibility should entertain anyone.
Rating10/10
GradeA+

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3
2018, Action, B+, Grade, Horror, Review, review-movie, Science Fiction, science fiction horror, Thriller, Year

Review: Upgrade

Leave a comment
Director(s)Leigh Whannell
Principal CastLogan Marshall-Green as Grey
Simon Maiden as STEM
Betty Gabriel as Detective Cortez
Harrison Gilbertson as Eron
Benedict Hardie as Fisk
Release Date2018
Language(s)English
Running Time 100 minutes

Grey’s a technophobic mechanic living in a future cyberpunk styled world whose life flips upside down after a brutal altercation leaves him as a quadriplegic. When he’s offered the choice to implant STEM, a technology that would fix the connection between his brain and nerves allowing him to move, he takes it in the hopes of gaining the ability to enact his own revenge. The result’s a genre-blending adventure with precise and sharp action scenes, fun bits of black humor, exciting thriller sequences, and a healthy dose of body-horror to boot.

This is a multifaceted story about humanity’s relationship with technology and the dangers of becoming absorbed by our creations. The technology available to the characters is both heavily futuristic – fully functional smart homes, voice operated cars, etc – but still has room for analog elements like manual cars. The contrast gives the setting a strange distant, but eerily close enough feeling which makes its message hit harder. The movie questions our general orientation towards technology from how often to how strongly we should use it. Before the incident, Grey exhibits a lot of autonomy. He doesn’t like using new technology and takes a kind of pride in his ability to perform tasks manually. That gives him a sense of purpose. The story painstakingly takes the time to juxtapose his resistance to tech with society’s wholehearted embrace of it. After he’s left immobile, he’s despondent. Despite having the technology available to do the tasks he needs to do, he finds no solace in existence. The loss of tactile interactivity is a death knell, and until he’s present with the possibility of it coming back , he doesn’t see a point in life. It’s a situation that raises some interesting questions about our sense of perception and evaluation. Is STEM no longer technology because Grey is using it as a conduit to control his own nerves, imbuing with some kind of human element? Why is using the other voice technology to help him as a quadriplegic not a conduit in a similar vein? If there is no difference , then it’s just a question of using technology to help achieve a purpose in life without overshadowing it. If there is a difference, then Grey’s choice is meaningful in how it presents the tumultuous agency issues we face when given tools that can do more than needed.Though the story’s exploration of these ideas isn’t as fleshed out as I’d want it to be,it’s certainly stylish enough to entertain you while giving you just enough food for thought.

If you saw Venom and wished the movie focused on and developed Tom Hardy’s relationship with the symbiote to a greater degree , this is the movie for you. The duo have tense moments, buddy-cop moments, light conversations, Q/A sessions, and everything in between. It feels like a fleshed out relationship and is the central focus of the story. STEM’s foreign presence in Grey’s body presents some agency issues as the two seek to mediate control over the flesh and blood body they both inhabit. STEM asks for permission to do certain acts and Grey permits them. This dynamic is accentuated by Marshall-Green’s great performance. He sells the weird not-in-control of body sensation that we see, and it genuinely feels like he’s just a passenger letting the driver, STEM, do it’s own thing. It’s a strange quandary ,because it’s all consensual. It’s a genius move that lets STEM work as a stand in for technology in general . We can choose to use it for set purposes and retain a sense of independence at the cost of doing “more” work, or we could let it do more work at the cost of less control. Or is it even a loss of control if we permit it? I won’t spoil where the conversation goes, but I can say that it’s presented in a way that’ll keep you engaged even if you aren’t that interested in the social commentary proper.

Whannell knows how to deliver crowd pleasing fights, and I was elated at how the camera moves and tilts at sharp technical angles. You can tell there’s a mechanical element involved and the choreography feels crisp and distinct. I could feel every single blow and felt myself almost moving along with the camera, like a flurry of quick, calculated strikes. The fast paced nature of the movement also gives way to some quick shock scares that are used sparingly to great effect. Furthermore, a lot of the violent scenes are clever and take full advantage of the environment the story takes place in. There’s one during the second act that had me both wincing in pain but also crying in laughter at how ridiculous it would be to die in such a fashion.

My biggest problem with the movie is outside of Grey and STEM, none of the other characters really stand out. I liked some of the antagonists, but outside of the final villain , no one else ever gets development that doesn’t feel paper thin. There are attempts made at introducing some faux human vs upgraded human schism ,references to the mistreatment of veterans , and some ideas of class division but, like the antagonists,they get left to the wayside. It’s a shame because I think all of these threads had the potential to be layered with each other to create something next level, but unfortunately nothing ever really jives with each other enough to give the movie any extra kick. This issue becomes even more apparent in the ending, which simultaneously suffers because of the under developed antagonistic forces while being chilling and horrifying because of the well-developed final villain.

REPORT CARD

TLDRUpgrade follows a quadriplegic man who agrees to undergo a surgery to move again. The twist? All his actions are mediated by a little microchip called STEM that talks and works with him to move his body. This cyberpunk body horror with healthy doses of both black comedy and action in an ambitious attempt at analyzing humanity’s relationship/increasing dependence on technology. Not everything worked, but what did work stuck with me.
Rating8.8/10
GradeB+

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3
2010s, 2015, A+, Drama, Grade, Review, review-movie, Year

Review: Krisha

Leave a comment
Director(s)Trey Edward Shults
Principal CastKrisha Fairchild as Krisha
Robyn Fairchild as Robyn
Bill Wise as Doyle
Trey Edward Shults as Trey
Release Date2015
Language(s)English
Running Time 81 minutes

Having already seen It Comes at Night, I expected Shults’s directorial debut, Krisha, to be ambiguous and unsettling. Though the story managed to get under my skin to an even greater degree than his sophomore feature, it’s much more straight-forward and clear. This is the story of Krisha, a women who returns to the family she abandoned in an attempt to patch things up during Thanksgiving. It doesn’t follow your typical story structure. There’s not one or two dramatic encounters into levity into redemption. This story is real, painful, and manages to explore the damage troubled family members can have on the whole unit in a truly visceral way that isn’t afraid to hold anything back.

The story starts off as Krisha parks her car and attempts to locate her estranged family’s household. We’re immediately given a view into her state of mind and it sets the tone for the disorienting events to come. She talks to herself, talks to inanimate objects, get irritated at inconveniences, and demonstrates a familiar but distant intimacy with her estranged family who all greet her with varied degrees of enthusiasm. From the loving embrace of her sister Robyn to the strange aloofness one of the youngsters, Trey, the movie makes it obvious that there’s a lot of history between Krisha and her kin and that she’s been gone for a long time. You know there’s something wrong there.

I love the way the movie is cut, scored, and presented. It’s a visually unique experience that makes the “estranged family member returns story” far more interesting. Events are inter cut and presented to keep a constant sense of action and uneasiness at play. Every time you feel safer in one scenario, the tension in another inter cut scene starts to ratchet up. There are lots of tracking shots and arc shots that are used to prolong this sense of uneasiness and create disorientation. In particular, one kitchen scene involving an arc shot got me feeling panicked and frantic as it constantly accelerated in speed. The music compliments what’s happening on the screen by accentuating the progression of Krisha’s journey. Early on we’re bombarded by discordant noises that make it impossible to focus yourself. It’s almost like Krisha can’t handle the intensity of coming back to her family and we’re right there with her. Later on music plays, the lyrics serving as a poetic backdrop to Krisha’s journey and transformation up till that point. Sound always has a purpose. All together the audio-visual elements breathe new life into the genre by taking commonplace Thanksgiving activities and functions far more tense than they need to be . It’s an an assault on the senses that never gives you a moment to settle in.

What sells the movie is just how real it all feels. Every performance is on point, but Krisha absolutely steals the show. From the way she looks to the way she carries herself, you can tell that she’s gone through a lot. Her panic translates in her frantic movements and uneasy quiet. The family interactions accurately convey the damage abusive family relationships can have. Members are constantly shown apart from Krisha, having moved forward in spite of her absence. Family interactions with Krisha are varied. Some are kind and open like Robyn, while others are more suspicious like Doyle, Krisha’s brother-in-law. It all comes together to paint a picture of the places families are willing to go to help those who fall of the beaten path. Simultaneously it doesn’t try and sugarcoat the trauma that comes from the abuse at play. The nuance hit me in how familiar it reminded me of my own experiences.

I only wish the movie was a bit longer, because I was interested in some of the hinted family drama that never gets revealed. I thought fleshing out certain character relations a bit more would make later conversations more relevant, but I never felt like I had a lack of information, so this might be more of a nitpick.

REPORT CARD

TLDRKrisha follows its titular namesake as she tries to re-integrate with her estranged family during Thanksgiving. However Shults has no intention of making this your typical rehabilitation story filled with positivity and Hallmark cliches. From the shot composition to the score, the movie injects every scene with palpable tension as we watch with baited breath, hoping Krisha can right the ship. This is a nerve-wracking and emotionally painful trip, but is definitely one worth taking.
Rating9.7/10
Grade A+

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3

A place for fun and rumination