Category Archives: 1980s

1980s, 1987, A+, Grade, Horror, Past, Review, review-movie, supernatural, Thriller, Year

Review: Hellraiser

Leave a comment
Director(s)Clive Barker
Principal CastClare Higgins as Julia Cotton
Ashley Laurence as Kirsty Cotton
Andrew Robinson as Larry Cotton
Oliver Smith as Monstrous Frank
Sean Chapman as Frank Cotton
Doug Bradley as Pinhead
Robert Hines as Steve
Release Date1987
Language(s)English
Running Time 93 minutes

A man meets a merchant in an shop somewhere in the Middle East. He’s asked what his pleasure is. He responds that its the box with an intricate series of designs adorning it that sits on the table. He gives the merchant stacks of cash and purchases the strange item. The movie cuts to this same man, Frank, as he sits in almost meditative position, attempting to solve the box.

Frank (Sean Chapman) surrounded by lights in an almost religious meditative state trying to solve the mysterious puzzle box.

He pushes and pulls the pieces of it in various directions until it opens. Suddenly, bursts of electricity shoot out and hooks emerge from the walls around him, ripping his body apart in a gory display. A group of bald, pale faced creatures emanating a demonic yet angelic presence emerge in the room and push the box back to its normal configuration. All signs of gore disappear and the house is vacant once again.

Soon after, Frank’s brother, Larry, and his wife, Julia, show up to the house ready to move into it. They explore an empty room and find signs of Frank’s loitering – an unkempt bed, a porcelain figure depicting sex, and a series of photographs depicting Frank with a host of women, each depicting a deviant sexuality. As Larry goes down to call his daughter, Kirsty, and let her know that she should come visit the Cotton’s new homestead, Julia thumbs through the photos until the camera reveals that it’s not the sexual acts that interest her as much as the man engaging in them- Frank. She takes and hides a photo of him and leaves the room.

As he helps the movers settle the new place up with furniture, Kirsty shows up. Meanwhile, Julia goes up to the attic of the house, with her secret photo in her hand. She rips off the head of the women next to Frank. As soon as she takes this action, the sink Kristy is attending to bursts open. Coincidence? The movie seems to imply the opposite as the water shooting out the sink transforms into Julia reminiscing about meeting Frank so many years ago in the rain. As Kristy comes to ask for a towel, Julia points the way to the bathroom and disappears once again, eager to remember the man she truly misses. As Frank seduces Julia, tenderly touching her lips and having her reciprocate, his brother in the present attempts to move a piece of furniture up the stairs. Frank’s humping cuts to Larry grunting as he forcefully attempts to push the furniture causing him to catch his hand on a loose nail. Blood pours out as he rushes for his wife’s help. He finds her in the attic, breaking her journey into the past, and in sharp contrast to his assertive brother holds his hand out, ready to faint and begging for medical attention. She takes his hand, without any of the passion she showed Frank’s in the past, and calmly tells him they need to stich it. His blood drips onto the floor and mysteriously disappears underneath the surface. After the couple leaves the room, the floorboards shake once again as body parts slowly rebuild themselves in gooey and disgusting ways. Frank’s skinless body emerges, revived from the blood of his brother.

  • Image 1
  • Image 2
  • Image 3
  • Image 4
  • Image 5
  • Image 6
  • Image 7
  • Image 8
  • Image 9
  • Image 10
  • Image 11
This montage sequence tells the story of Hellraiser from a thematic level through some beautiful cross-cutting. The first image shows Julia (Clare Higgins) ripping out the head of another girl so she can focus on her former lover, Frank (Sean Chapman). As she remembers her infidelity, the sink bursts downstairs as Kirsty (Ashley Laurence) tries to use it, signifying the hidden way Frank has burst open the Cotton family (Image 2). Meanwhile the water fades to rain as Julia remembers her first time meeting Frank (Image 3). Their meeting becomes sexual as Frank caresses Julia’s lip awakening her desire to do actively take his fingers and do the same (Image 4 and 5). As he has sex with her in next image , his humps fade into his brothers grunting back and forth motion as the latter tries to move furniture up the stairs. As he snags his hand and starts bleeding (Image 7), the movie cuts to Julia sobbing at the state of her life and her fonder memories of Frank (Image 8). Larry (Andrew Robinson) comes up with his bloodied hand, demonstrating his weaker and less aggressive tendencies compared to his brother – giving his hand over to be mended over a flesh wound as opposed to stirring up romance on his partners lips (Image 9). In the last row, his blood is devoured by his brother beneath and the final image recounts Frank’s (Oliver Smith) new revival into the world of the living (Image 11).


This montage is the story of Clive Barker’s Hellraiser – a women who can’t find passion in her marriage trading a facsimile of love for a lusty love with her partner’s brother. A brother coming and disrupting his brother’s life for his own satisfaction. Are the Hellraisers the Cenobites from the beginning who rip Frank apart, or are they the Franks that exist in peoples lives, ripping them apart for their own selfish whims and desires? Just as Frank burst into the newlywed’s marriage so many years ago taking his brother’s partner from him, he emerges in the household by taking his brothers blood. The brilliant editing and matching of elements – water from the pipes for rain, the tenderness of the erotic use of fingers between Julia and Frank versus the almost pitiful way Julia tends to Larry – tells you everything you need to know. This is a story about lust and the way perverse desires take control.

After discovering Frank’s body upstairs, Julia agrees to do whatever it takes to help him fully recover to his previous incarnation, even if it requires killing people to give Frank new blood- new fuel to regenerate the body that he had lost so long ago. This deviancy is reflected not just in the story and its progression, but in the plethora of intriguing and striking compositions that suggest and reinforce both a spiritual dimension to the hedonistic impulses of the characters and a perversion of a “normal” way of approaching pain and pleasure.

The image of the figures represent the duality of normalcy and deviancy – the action is the same but our perception of them differ radically. The “normalcy” of the sex by the couple on the left is changed into something perverse by the presence of the cockroach on the right.

Frank’s early tampering with the box evoke the image of ascetics of old flagellating themselves for spiritual enlighten, to control their inner desires. However, instead of seeking to curb his drive, Frank seeks to explore the uttermost limits of them. As he reveals, he opened the box because it promised to open doors to the “pleasures of heaven or hell. [He] didn’t care which.” The religious reference juxtaposed with the idea of pleasure as opposed to pleasure and pain makes it clear that hedonism is not the opposite spirituality. Pleasure can be found in both heaven and in hell. They’re two sides of the same coin – both promising a kind of liminal aesthesis – an agency that transcends the body and gives way to the soul. Obviously, it’s a radical idea tying in the practice of saints with the practice of sadomasochism, but the movie so finely repeats and plays with the connection that the torture porn it serves up gains a spiritual association.

This is best exemplified by the design of the Cenobites themselves. Despite only being on the screen for a short amount of time, they make their presence known and have endured as horror icons in the vein of Jason and Michael for a reason. In particular their leader, Pinhead, is absolutely a sight to see. As his name implies, his face is littered with a series of pins, both reflecting pain but also calling in images of acupuncture, a relief from pain. The circular shapes are littered along a linear grid, giving the otherwise macabre display a geometric aesthetic that’s oddly pleasing. Bradley adds to this mystique by speaking the characters otherwise terrifying lines with a sense of authority and coldness. It’s apparently clear that he’s in charge when he shows up, taking center stage, like a dark angel would.

Pinhead( Doug Bradley) radiates an authority and otherworldly beauty rendered horrifying by the presence of pins and body modifications.

As he tells the characters, the Cenobites have been known to be “angels to some, demons to others.” His appearance along with his cohorts serves as wonderful contrast to the heavy amounts of Christian iconography that occupy every inch of the Cotton household, with images of Jesus Christ appearing from everywhere, including hiding within a closet (how’s that for a queer deviancy?). There are so many small details that sell the realism from the spectacular lighting (the rooms become a hazy blue with cracks of light pouring in along with dust from their normal state) whenever the Cenobites show up to the way the floorboards take in blood and move.

The reason all these disparate elements come together as well as they do is the immaculate practical effects work being done. There’s a healthy amount of gore present- if the opening scene of Frank being ripped apart didn’t give it away- this is not the movie you should watch if you can’t handle blood. The way the flesh tears apart and the bodies are mangled and left emaciated will leave tingles running down your spine. Frank’s revival is one part disgusting and two parts fascinating as his entire body is slowly rebuilt in front of our eyes. It’s hard to imagine that hellspawn is not actually being born in front of your eyes. Skinless Frank looks like a real person who’s been ripped apart and oozing blood, when in reality it’s just an exceptionally thin Oliver Smith wearing a bodysuit . Likewise, the Cenobites themselves are a masterwork in both aesthetic design and actual presentation. None of the pins embedded in Pinhead’s face look fake and the mutilation present on the Cenobites’ bodies in general are disturbing, yet eerily beautiful.

Likewise, the performances are all on point and help develop the sensuous and kinky story in a way that doesn’t come off as farfetched. Chapman does a great job inducing and presenting himself as the asshole Frank is from the aggressive and confident way he positions and hold his body. Everything about him radiates a “bad boy” energy. Smith carries this over to his portrayal of the revived Frank, keeping the same “alpha male” personality but ramping the malice up to match the situation. Clare Higgins performance is the heart of the movie, given that her infidelity and desire for a heated romance, serves as the spark that moves the acts along. She absolutely nails the feeling of lust and dissatisfaction in the early montage when she thinks back to Frank and their night so many years ago. When asked to help revive him, she demonstrates both a tender affection for the skinless monstrosity and an eagerness to get the future she actually wants. Her character might just be looking for a good shag, but Higgins gives these motivations the desperation they need to make us care.

If I had a problem with the movie it would be with the way the final minutes of the movie proceed. There feels like a very clear cut off point that feels like its needlessly dragged out to induce some last minute tension and “will they/won’t they survive” thoughts in the audience, but the scares just don’t match the ferocity of what came before. In particular, there’s a focus on constantly utilizing the lighting effect that’s only briefly used throughout the movie to symbolize the Cenobites coming from the mysterious puzzle box. It looks corny and cheap compared to the stunning production of everything else and its overuse feels almost comical in the third act. On top of this, the nice shot compositions give way to a lot of extreme facial closeups along with some of the not-so-great practical effect creatures and it ends up making the last few minutes feel jumbled. Thankfully, this addendum gives way to a genuinely chilling final scene that’ll leave you chilled, so it’s not like the movie suffers a huge blow. It’s just a shame because of how perfect the film is up to this point.

Report Card

TLDRHellraiser is a bold and ambitious story that situates sexuality against spirituality to great effect. From the religious iconography to the absolutely spectacular practical effects, Barker’s’ feature debut has all the marks of a master work in horror, delivering on both the gore and the thought provoking idea that there is a kind of religious agency to be found in the liminal spaces of pain as pleasure. Whether you’re looking for healthy amounts of gore, deviant sexual and spiritual ideas, or a kinky horror movie, Hellraiser will “tear your soul apart.”
Rating9.7/10
GradeA+

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

 

Pages: 1 2
1980s, 1982, C, Grade, Horror, mystery, Review, review-movie, slasher, Thriller, Year

Review: Friday the 13th Part 3

Leave a comment
Director(s)Steve Miner
Principal CastDana Kimmell as Chris
Richard Brooker as Jason Voorhees
Catherine Parks as Vera
Larry Zerner as Shelly
Paul Kratka as Rick
Tracie Savage as Debbie
Jeffrey Rogers as Andy
David Katims as Chuck
Rachel Howard as Chili
Nick Savage as Ali
Release Date1982
Language(s)English
Running Time 95 minutes

Part 3 of the Friday the 13th franchise is my favorite one. I think it has the scariest interpretation of Jason (and I’m not just talking about the introduction of his iconic mask), some great and well-executed false scares, and one of the best non-Jason related bits in the franchise coming through in the form of a biker gang. Not all the parts work together as well as you’d want and the focus on making pivotal scenes in 3D really hurts the non-3D watching experience. However, none of those aspects can stop this third entry from being a whole lot of goofy fun.

The story picks a day after the end of Part 2 and follows Jason for a short bit as he looks for clothes and new victims to murder. After showing Jason making quick work of a local couple, the movie cuts to Chris and her group of friends as they travel down to Chris’s lake house by the infamous Crystal Lake. The story, like the previous installments of the franchise, follows our motley group of youngsters as they slowly get offed by Jason before his inevitable confrontation with the final girl. However, the path the movie takes to its foregone conclusion is what sets it apart and keeps it intriguing, especially when compared with the previous two installments.

It’s made apparent early on that Chris has experienced some trauma at Crystal Lake before the events of the story. It’s obvious this has something to do with Jason and the development of the two characters history and relation to each other makes sections in the third act feel like unique as opposed to re-heated slasher fare. Chris’s struggle to survive is tied into her character arc so you feel invested watching her try to outwit Jason to the very end. This struggle is made more interesting by the story’s decision to give Jason some actual character definition. No longer is he just a hulking mass set to kill. Okay he is most of the time, but with Chris his previously just violent actions take on a far more sinister undercurrent. This is probably the only Friday movie that’s made me dislike Jason as an evil and reprehensible character.

This is also one of the only movies in the franchise to have interesting side characters in the form of Vera and Shelly, and their interactions keep the movie intriguing even when Jason isn’t brutalizing someone. Shelly is a “nice guy”/incel type loner who feels alienated and takes on the role of group prankster to keep attention on him. When he’s introduced to Vera as her blind date for the camp trip, she quickly vetoes. Normally you’d expect that to be the end of that, but the story takes time to situate the two characters in relation to each other.  One of the best moments in the movie comes from the pair trying to navigate their way around an angry biker gang because it gives the characters room to grow and learn more about one another. My only issue is that the story spends all this time developing the characters and generating intrigue to spend it all on a nice kill scene. It’s a definite waste of potential and makes me wonder if something more was planned with them that fizzled out.

This is a slasher that loves to fake out the audience with its scare set-ups. Normally, something like that would get on my nerves, but the movie makes it obvious from the start that it’s’ going to be playing this game with the audience. Shelly starts the movie playing “scary” pranks on the other characters and sets the expectation that everything isn’t what it really seems.As the story progresses the set-ups leading to the false scares and subsequent real scares get more in-depth leading to some genuinely great kill sequences. Unfortunately, the heavy use of 3D technology takes away the “oomph” of some of the better set-up kill sequences.

Abel (David Wiley) holding up an eyeball. Bet this would’ve looked better in actual 3D. Instead it just feels awkward.



This isn’t because the 3D is inherently bad or anything, but rather because lot of these shots were composed to highlight and show-off the technology. Without it, these same scenes lose a lot what of they seem to be going for.

I can only hope for the day where 3D technology is more ubiquitous so I can experience this movie in its fully glory, but as it stands right now a lot of the scenes its utilized in come off corny or forced. In fact, this is a criticism I think a lot of people can levy against the movie in general- it’s corny and forced. A lot of the dialogue leaves something to be desired. Performances, while not outright bad, are certainly nothing to write home about. Certain sub-plots come out of or go nowhere – a biker gang making an impromptu rendezvous in the story certainly feels like it could’ve been used for more effect. The already messy Friday timeline becomes even more convoluted and will have you asking what Jason’s game really is. However, despite all these issues and missed opportunities there’s a real fun and heart present. I laughed out loud more than one times both at the movies jokes and the absurdities it presented. I ended up grooving and wanting to dance to the new electric rendition of the classic theme song. I felt myself care about the main character and wanting her to win against a Jason I came to genuinely dislike.  I can see why other fans of the franchise may not enjoy this movie, but for me it’s the one I put in whenever I want to have a fun Friday the 13th time.

REPORT CARD

TLDRFriday the 13th Part Three doesn’t radically change up the franchise formula, but that doesn’t stop it from being a good bit of fun. There are fun kill sequences, interesting scare fake-outs, a groovy main theme, and of course the introduction of Jason’s iconic mask. The 3D elements of the movie don’t hold up as well in a 2D environment (have yet to see the movie in 3D), but I appreciate the effort that went into trying to utilize the technology to create more gripping and attentive kill scenes. If you’re looking for a more menacing Jason and something a bit different than parts I and II, I think you should give this chapter a go ahead.
Rating7.4/10
GradeC

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

Pages: 1 2 3
1980s, 1981, B+, Grade, Horror, mystery, Review, review-movie, slasher, Thriller, Year

Review: Friday the 13th Part 2

Leave a comment
Director(s)Steve Miner
Principal CastAmy Steel as Ginny
John Furey as Paul
Adrienne King as Alice
Steve Daskewisz as Jason
Release Date1981
Language(s)English
Running Time 87 minutes

Friday the 13th Part Two is one of the few horror sequels that manages to take what was interesting and effective in the first movie and add to it substantially.The story is better paced than the originals with kills being effectively spread throughout the movie to keep the tension and excitement more constant. Characters are given time to develop and become people who you can root for. Jason is actually the villain (even if not adorned with his iconic hockey mask) and adds a certain level of brutality to the kills that was missing before. This is a sequel that has everything a fan of the original could want and more.

The movie opens up with a quick recap of the end of first movie which is then revealed to be nightmare Alice is having/reliving as a result of her trauma . Within a few moments she’s unceremoniously killed by Jason with a cut to the title card. Normally the death of a previous final girl in such a mean spirited fashion (coughs in Halloween 5) gets me upset , but Alice was such a non factor in the first movie (one of my major criticisms) that it almost feels nice knowing that we’re getting someone new. After the title card, the story picks up 5 years with the reopening of a camp on the shores of Crystal Lake. Cue title card.

The first thing the story does that’s a marked improvement over its predecessor is clearly establishing a crew of characters with identifiable traits. Paul, the camp owner, is a well-mannered guy trying to do good for his students and those that they’ll interact with. Ginny (our final girl), his girlfriend, is a fun loving, witty, child psychology student. When the final act starts and and her back is pushed against the wall, you really appreciate how well her characters strengths are set up earlier. She’s resourceful and tenacious in a way that places you squarely in her corner. The main set of campers that are set to be slaughtered by Jason are, for the most part, likable and fleshed out just the right amount. Performances feel genuine and the staffers feels like young adults just messing around with one another. Characters get to interact with each other over elongated periods giving the audience a reason to care about their ultimate fates.

Likewise, there’s some thought given to developing Jason. He’s not just some hulking monster in the woods waiting to kill nubiles. His actions feel purposeful and the way the film subtly (and not so subtly in one particular scene) builds up his psychology and way of life raises a lot of interesting questions. Unfortunately, not all of those questions get answers that feel acceptable, the biggest being how Jason is alive despite being “dying” decades previously. The whole driving force behind Pamela’s murder spree in the first movie is her belief that Jason had died because of negligent camp counselors. If he hadn’t actually died, then that means he was just living out in the forest relaxing. If this was the case, then why didn’t he act to help his mom when she was struggling? The film would like to have you believe he witnessed her death and took revenge; that’s what the opening sequence with Alice was supposed to indicate. It’s just that that requires uprooting the basis of the whole story or coming up with a convoluted headcanon to explain what’s going on. This is a problem that’s endemic with the franchise. It rarely knows what it wants in the moment, so there are a lot of retcons/oddities in the plot that make otherwise interesting moments confusing. That being said, I think the good outweighs the bad and got over the issue on my third play-through.

Now one thing that the first installment got right was the kill scenes due to the practical effects magic of Tom Savini. Despite not being able to get him on the second movie, the kills and their respective brutality are still on display (even if they don’t reach the same consistent heights). In fact, one of my favorite kills in the franchise happens early on and it might be one of the most mean spirited slasher kills I’ve ever seen. It’s just brutal and demonstrates (as if we even needed it) that Jason has absolutely no qualms with who he murders.

Unfortunately even though the movie makes huge strides in improving and refining the slasher formula , there’s more than one oddball moment that feels out of place with the realism and sense of urgency that’s being set up. For example, there’s a moment where a group of characters makes a gruesome discovery only to be stopped in the act. However, the spectacle they came upon is never mentioned by anyone else despite its potential importance in saving future characters lives. There’s another moment where Jason comes upon a character and they literally just stand there waiting to die. While there aren’t a lot of weird moments like these, they definitely stick out like sore thumbs and make the movie feel more uneven.

REPORT CARD

TLDRFriday the 13th Part Two is a rare sequel that fixes its predecessors mistakes while building on the aspects of it that fans love. Sure there are some oddball moments that feel out of place with the more grounded and realistic setting the movie tries to go for. Thankfully, none of these moments derail the movie when it’s at its best – delving into the psychology of its killer and providing tense and effective kill sequences.
Rating8.5/10
GradeB+

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

Pages: 1 2 3
1980s, 1981, B, Grade, Horror, Review, review-movie, slasher, Thriller, Year

Review: Halloween II

Leave a comment
Director(s)Rick Rosenthal
Principal CastJaime Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode
Donald Pleasence as Dr.Sam Loomis
Dick Warlock as Michael Myers
Release Date1981
Language(s)English
Running Time 92 minutes

Halloween II picks up immediately after the end of Halloween with Laurie being transferred to a hospital following her near fatal encounter with Michael. Unfortunately for her he’s not only alive but he’s also looking to finish what he started by taking her out of the picture. What follows is a Halloween skinned Friday the 13th style slasher that’s packed to the brim with spectacular kills and a score that’s as iconic as the originals.

I’ll be honest. I think that Halloween II introduces a plot point/reveal that the mainline Halloween franchise has never been able to satisfyingly deal with. It’s the core behind Michael’s motivation and deflates a lot of the ambiguity that makes him so frightening in the first movie. As a result everything from the first movie feels off. Myers goes from “the Shape” to a person with human desires. The issue is the movie then tries to reconcile that with his general supernatural and distant characterization and it comes off as confusing. Furthermore, the way the reveal happens is so cheap and tacked on that the entire movie feels like it could have happened without this scene’s inclusion. It feels lazy and out of place, which is made all the worse because it is literally the driving force behind the story.

Now that I’ve gotten that out of my system, I can absolutely say this movie is entertaining if you can look past this plot point. The kills are creative and the set-ups are well worth watching. There’s one scene in particular where a nurse thinks Michael is her lover, whom she doesn’t realize has already been killed off. Watching the scene play out demonstrates the fundamental identity issue with the movie. The scene is terrifying because you know what’s going to happen and the nurse’s manner of death is particularly dreadful to imagine. However, the drawn out almost comical nature of it feels counter to how decisive and no-nonsense he feels in the first part. It’s not like all the kill scenes are like this. In fact, Rosenthal has more than his fair share of voyeuristic camera kills like Carpenter had made all the more interesting by the long white hallways of the hospital. It’s just that when a kill happens that doesn’t fit in the with that general current you can feel how out of place it is. If you’re just looking for a slasher with innovative and entertaining kills, this movie has them in spades and I can see why so many fans of the franchise have a fondness for this movie.

The score is also noteworthy for being nearly as entertaining as the original’s, which I think is one of the most immersive scores in horror cinema. Carpenter’s new rendition of the iconic theme is similar enough to evoke the feelings of nostalgia but feels new and energetic. Granted, I love synth music but I also think the score perfectly captures what the movie wanted to do in hearkening back to the original while being it’s own thing. I love how the usually sweet and soothing “Mr. Sandman” by The Chordettes is utilized in the movie. It comes off as sinister and unnerving in context which I think is testament to how well Rosenthal nails atmosphere. The first time I heard it play while watching I thought it was coming from somewhere else because of how odd its selection felt in such a movie. However, if you ask me now, I can’t imagine the movie without the song.

The one aspect of the movie that I genuinely enjoyed and think was pulled off well throughout the movie is the fear of the holiday of Halloween. The idea that it’s a holiday filled with fear and repression is exemplified through multiple different actions that are only tangentially related. Near the beginning of the movie a child is in the Emergency Room and we get a glimpse of his bloodied mouth. It hearkens back to rumors of razors in candy-bars and the fear that our own neighbors could harm our children. Moments like these add a much needed texture to the movie that place the central conflict within the schema of traditional Halloween scares and fears. It doesn’t elevate the movie up to where Halloween is, but it certainly gives the movie a more distinctive identity than just die fodder die.

REPORT CARD

TLDRI have a love hate relationship with this movie. On the one hand I love that it feels and plays like a continuation of Halloween . You could literally play this as soon as the first movie ended and it would feel like one fully encompassing piece. The similarity is so uncanny that fan-cuts mixing the two movies feel seamless without close inspection. Unfortunately, this latter half of the two-parter undoes a lot of what made the original so frightening and interesting, settling instead for a Friday the 13th style slaughter fest with a hackneyed plot that serve as the story’s main driver. It’s an entertaining gore-fest but feels less elevated in its themes and atmosphere.
Rating8.0/10
GradeB

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

Pages: 1 2 3
1980s, 1987, A+, Black-Comedy, Comedy, Grade, Horror, Review, review-movie, supernatural, Year

Review: Evil Dead 2

Leave a comment
Director(s)Sam Raimi
Principal CastBruce Campbell as Ash Williams
Denise Bixler as Linda
Sarah Berry as Annie Knowby
Release Date1987
Language(s)English
Running Time 84 minutes

If I’d have known how funny Evil Dead 2 was, I’m pretty sure I would’ve watched The Evil Dead a lot earlier. Somehow, Sam Raimi took everything good from the fist movie, removed the unnecessary clutter, slapped in some intriguing retcons, and amped the comedy up by a factor of bonker. The result is a one of a kind sequel that gives fans of the original everything they want and more , while feeling like its own story The scares are more interesting, the turns are completely out of left field, and the movie has a lot more fun with itself.

I knew the movie was going to be weird the moment the first scene started. The movie picks up on a “recap” of the events of the first movie, except this time everyone except Linda is missing. Missing as in Ash doesn’t even mention their existence.In his recounting, Ash explains that he went to the cabin for a romantic get-away with Linda (not the fun group bonding we were told in the first movie). Once there, a similar series of events lead to Dr.Knowby’s tape being played and the evil of the Necronomicon being summoned. Right off the bat, the movie forces the audience to come to its own conclusions. Did Ash experience so much trauma during the first movie, that his mind warped the perception of events to the most painful event he went through? Did burning the Necronomicon at the end of the first movie cause an alternative timeline where everyone else didn’t exist? It’s up to you to decide. After the”recap” concludes, Ash finds himself forced to once again deal with the hijinks of the cabin.

With each passing supernatural phenomena, Ash finds himself slipping, unable to differentiate between real events, his delusions, and the supernatural happenings. His experience and interaction with the world feels surreal. Ash is very clearly is experiencing some kind of trauma . Within the span of a day he’s lost his friends ( who may or may not exist), had to kill his girlfriend, been tossed around by supernatural happenings, experience a litany of physical injuries (many self inflicted through sheer clumsiness), and been incessantly mocked by deadlites. It’s enough to turn anyone bonkers, and Bruce Campbell proficiently demonstrates as much with his absurd and hilarious facial expressions. He constantly moves/messes with his eyes, eyebrows, and forehead making him feel unpredictable and energetic, like a switch has flipped in him that’s caused him to become a loose cannon. He really channels this raw chaotic neutral/good vibe that never slows down.

Ash’s (Bruce Campbell) crazy facial expression.

His descent into madness is equal parts terrifying and hilarious. This is a man who’s clearly lost control in his life. He didn’t sign up for any of this and awful things keep happening at breakneck speed forcing him to constantly fight for his life. Losing your mind on top of dealing with all of these issues sounds like hell, like an infinite void that will never let go. Thankfully, the whole experience comes off as a joke. As Ash loses his mind, he becomes more unhinged and cartoon like, going from a clumsy and sweet goof to bloodthirsty and confident. It’s not that the situations are any less serious. It’s just that the story lets you experience them without falling into some weird nihilism.

Everything you loved about the first movie look and feel wise is here and polished up. Fast paced camera chasing subject through the forest? Check. Chainsaw slashing through deadlite splattering blood everywhere? Check. Bruce Campbell’s eyebrows threatening to fight the enemy by themselves? Also check. The best part is all the effects have gotten even better and more polished. The practical effect work feels even smoother and works seamlessly. Possessions look more crisp and grounded as opposed to just nightmarish. My only issue is that ome of the stop-motion feels a bit choppy in the third act, but that’s a small complaint in the grand scheme of things.

REPORT CARD

TLDREvil Dead 2 is honestly just one of those rare sequels that takes an winning formula and fine tunes it to near perfection. The comedic turn the franchise takes gives it a unique flavor and allows its horrifying elements to really shine. If you enjoyed the first movie and want to see more, check this out. It’s one of a kind.
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
1980s, 1981, A+, Grade, Horror, Review, review-movie, supernatural, Year

Review: The Evil Dead

Leave a comment
Director(s)Sam Raimi
Principal CastBruce Campbell as Ash Williams
Ellen Sandweiss as Cheryl Williams
Hal Delrich as Scott
Betsy Baker as Linda
Theresa Tilly as Shelly
Release Date1981
Language(s)English
Running Time 85 minutes

This is one of the few western horror movies I grew up watching, so it’s near and dear to my heart. As a naive middle school student, I believed the reviews online that said it was cheesy and corny. The word funny was thrown around everywhere, so I went in thinking I’d be laughing a lot. After the movie, I was left horrified. Nightmares for days on end. Tons of high pitched cackling involved. I refused to go near it again. Then the soft reboot, Evil Dead, was announced. It looked scary and intriguing and I was immediately reminded of the terrors of my not so distant youth. I decided then and there, that I had to get over the movie eventually and immediately went and saw The Evil Dead. The movie still scared me, but because I knew what was going to happen, I could view the events with a certainty.I could sit back and just watch the madness unfold. Now that I’m done a few rewatches, I can confidently say Sam Raimi’s low budget horror movie is one of the best ever made. It manages to scare me, intrigue me, impress me, and make me chuckle a few times every time I put it on.

The plot is campy if you look at it from today’s standards but you should keep in mind the movie came out back in the 80’s and was considered one of the scariest back then. It was ahead of its time and dared to go to some awful, depraved places. The story follows a group of five teenage friends – Ash, his sister Cheryl, his girlfriend Linda, their friend Scott, and Scott’s girlfriend, ,Shelly – as they go off to a cabin in the woods to party and enjoy themselves. From the moment they step foot in the area, things are off. When Scott goes to open the door, a swing repeatedly knocks into the wall of the house, almost as if another entity is trying to enter. Once our group opens the door, the knocking stops creating a sense of impending doom. After a series of events leads to an incantation from the Necronomicon Ex-Mortis being chanted , things quickly go south as malevolent supernatural entities come to play.

The movie is very much a story of an unfortunate group of “kids” who are only partially to blame for their situation. They barely have time to do anything because the action st arts almost immediately, and the actions they do end up taking are heavily influenced by the supernatural. It’s almost like they’re doomed into a situation. This is made all the worse because the story takes time to develop the characters, so watching them get tortured is hard. It’s a few moments here and there, but character motivations are fleshed out and almost everyone feels like they have a purpose in the story. Yes, the story is mainly about Ash, but that doesn’t mean everyone else just exists as a prop. The story makes use of these relationships to create horrifying, gut-wrenching, and comedic moments.

It’s easy to tell there are production issues. Yes, Raimi didn’t have a ton of money to spend to make this look realistic. So he doubles down on the absurdity of the situation and makes the action and horror sequences bloody, over the top, and disturbing all at the same time. Makeup is on point. It gets bloody and really shows the damage the supernatural events are having on the group. As evidenced by below, it can get pretty real.

Makeup is on point. The Deadites look absolutely horrific.

Embracing the over the top gore makes the movie both horrifying and comedic. The production issues feel like intentional ways of showcasing the absurdity of whatever is going on. In the face of absolutely nightmarish situations it makes so much sense to laugh, because taking it seriously would make you go crazy (which is more Evil Dead 2). The humor doesn’t come from overt jokes. It comes from the juxtaposition of ineptitude with the horrific nature of what’s going on. Bruce Campbell goes full klutz as Ash. He finds a way to fall or crash in every scene, and puts his full energy into each and every tumble. You can feel the incompetence seep out of him. Add on some crazy facial expressions with his distinctive eyebrows, and suddenly every situation becomes a bit funnier. The spirits haunting the cabin also have a sick sense of humor. They love laughing in horrific sounding cackles and joking about everyone’s darkest fears. They actually relish just making people suffer. It’s funny in the moment, but every time I stop and think about the reality of what’s going on, I shudder. There’s a lot of messed up stuff here that I laughed at because taking it seriously was too off-putting. One scene involving Cheryl has stuck with me ever since I saw it. I have no idea how it got in there, but if sexual assault scenes that are visceral in nature are too much for you, you might want to watch it with a buddy.

To add on to all of the visual splatter and horror, the movie employs a lot of surreal/abstract imagery. There are recurring motifs that are fun to track throughout the movie that have you questioning their real purpose. These scenes are my favorite because I love that weird ambiguous artsy stuff that has you analyzing and re-contextualizing constantly. There are some more obvious symbols/icons that are also used to great effect, so the movie manages to balance the abstract with the “grounded” really well. It lends to a well crafted horror movie that has scares for multiple groups of people.

The camera movement is also exceptional and highly effective. Raimi knows exactly when to do close-ups and every time he does one it feels purposeful. No movement ever feels wasted. When the supernatural force is hunting down the members of the group, the camera moves frantically showing it choosing its next victim. It’s almost like the air and everything around the cabin is tinged with a negativity that seeks to envelop everything.

REPORT CARD

TLDRThe Evil Dead is a movie that manages to be hilariously over-the-top and horrifying at the same time. The humor is dark and absurd in nature and is used to counterbalance the violence and splatter-fests the movie ventures off into. If you can get over the “dated” feel and/or watch the movie as if it’s 1981, you’ll get swept up in one of the scariest horror movies made. A surreal nightmare turned black comedy.
Rating9.8/10
GradeA+

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

Pages: 1 2
1980s, 1983, A, Action, Adventure, Epic, Fantasy, Grade, Review, review-movie, Science Fiction, Year

Review: Star Wars:Episode VI – Return of the Jedi

Leave a comment
Director(s)Richard Marquand
Principal CastMark Hamill as Luke Skywalker
Harrison Ford as Han Solo
Carrie Fisher as Leia
Billy Dee Williams as Lando
Anthony Daniels as C-3PO
Peter Mayhew as Chewbacca
Kenny Baker as R2-D2
Ian McDiarmid as The Emperor
Frank Oz as Yoda
David Prowse/James Earl Jones as Darth Vader
Release Date1983
Language(s)English
Running Time132 minutes

Finally, the end of the original trilogy. A New Hope was amazing. The Empire Strikes Back was an absolute gem. So it’s reasonable to say my expectations for the conclusion were sky high. Thankfully, Richard Marquand’s Return of the Jedi, serves as a satisfying conclusion to this amazing journey. It didn’t do everything I wanted and felt uneven at times, but I’d be lying if I said I didn’t absolutely enjoy the ride and conclusion.

The film picks up sometime after the end of The Empire Strikes Back and follows Luke and the gang as they try and rescue Han from Jabba’s palace. Personally, I wish the movie started off immediately after the ending of the last movie or sometime close to it. The scene’s ambiguous chronological placement makes things like power scaling and character development harder to appreciate or understand. This causes weird discrepancies later on because it feels like there should be more tension between certain characters or a wider variety of emotional responses. Thankfully, the latter portions of the third act are so emotionally cathartic and symbolically powerful that I could get over these issues.

Now that we got over the beginning rant, let’s get into the more interesting and fun stuff. A lot of the visual effects are amazing. Jabba looks a living creature and oozes a creepy and disgusting feeling. I felt revolted every time I saw him on the screen. The Rancor is terrifying to look at and despite having watched the visual wonder of the past two movies, I couldn’t believe how fluid the creatures movements look. Space battles still look great and evoke a sense of grandeur. However, some of the effects felt like they missed the mark. In particular, there’s a racing scene in the third act that has great choreography but looks dated, which is strange given how great the previous two films looked.

This movie nails characters for the most part. In particular, I loved Ian McDiarmid’s portrayal of the Emperor. From his speaking pattern to the way he held himself as he moved, he constantly felt malicious and evil. Yes, he mentions the “Dark Side” a lot, but because he feels so dark it feels aesthetically cool in spite of how sparse some of his dialogue options are. James Earl Jones sells the emotional weight of Darth Vader’s lines which serve as the undercurrent of so much of the weight of the entire movie. His scenes with Mark Hamill were my favorite because of the way they played off each other. I won’t spoil anything, but certain lines hit me in my feels hard. Frank Oz is also great as Yoda and made me desperately want more of him than what I actually got. The only character that I didn’t really like was Han, which is surprising, because I loved him in the previous films. Before, he always felt like a cool adventurous badass, but he feels “grayer” in this film and it doesn’t feel like it stems from a believable character arc.

This movie was also philosophically beautiful and expanded a lot on my want’s from the previous movie. I enjoyed the way that good and evil and their relative malleability were challenged and the resulting discourse made me feel a sense of hope. Unfortunately, there are a lot of missed opportunities that would have elevated that discourse to something more cinematic. The starting point of the film means that a lot of the despair of the past movie is kind of glossed over. As a result, certain character conclusions and reactions feel less deserved and more artificial than I would have liked. There’s also a lot of exposition scenes that are used to explain these gaps or hammer in plot points , which compounds this effect. I wish some of the bloated sections of the second act were taken out, and that the exposition/backstory was shown instead of told. It would’ve helped make the themes more cohesively tied to the narrative.

REPORT CARD

TLDRReturn of the Jedi is a satisfying conclusion to the original Star Wars trilogy and I’m genuinely surprised at how cohesive the entire story feels. This movie has a few bumpy spots and feels rushed at certain points , but is by and large emotionally cathartic and satisfying.I already know I’m going to watch the original trilogy again. The only question is how soon. Give it a shot if you haven’t.
Rating9.0/10
GradeA

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

Pages: 1 2 3
1980, 1980s, A+, Action, Adventure, Epic, Fantasy, Grade, Review, review-movie, Science Fiction, Year

Review: Star Wars:Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back

Leave a comment
Director(s)Irvin Kershner
Principal CastMark Hamill as Luke Skywalker
Harrison Ford as Han Solo
Carrie Fisher as Leia
Billy Dee Williams as Lando
Anthony Daniels as C-3PO
Peter Mayhew as Chewbacca
Kenny Baker as R2-D2
Ian McDiarmid as The Emperor
Frank Oz as Yoda
David Prowse/James Earl Jones as Darth Vader
Date Released1980
Language(s)English
Running Time124 minutes

After watching this movie, I had to take a few moments to pick my jaw back up and compose myself long enough to write out just how much I loved each and every moment. Irvin Kershner’s sequel, The Empire Strikes Back, manages to improve and innovate on what its predecessor did in amazing ways. The story follows up with our motley crew of heroes as they’re on the run from the Galactic Empire. Except this time, things aren’t going to be nearly as easy.

Just like A New Hope, the practical and visual effects in this movie are off the charts. Spaceships look gorgeous and the chase scenes in this movie genuinely had me clamping down on my knuckles. I don’t know if it was just my love for what I was seeing or if there was an actual improvement, but the light sabers feel more “solid” in this movie which I appreciated a lot. It gave them the impact I thought they deserved. There’s also an pivotal character (I’ll avoid naming them for those rare people who have somehow avoided all spoilers) done exclusively through CGI/puppet work and the attention to detail with said character makes them feel almost even more well realized than some of the human characters. If that isn’t good special effects work I don’t know what is.

That isn’t a knock on any of the characters by the way. They all feel more realized and grounded in this movie. Whereas in the last movie, we had to watch our main group constantly stay on the run, this movie affords some time to help develop new interactions and milestones. It’s not that the arcs themselves are revolutionary. Rather, they’re just presented and executed so masterfully that I couldn’t stop getting giddy at watching them unfold- especially in regards to the Han and Leia scenes. The acting by our main cast is also stellar and makes these moments more engaging.

However, I’d be remiss if I failed to mention how much the Empire gets developed in the aptly titled Empire Strikes Back. Vader’s motivations and choices are interesting and paying attention to differentiation in his actions helped me infer quite a lot. I appreciate that he’s not a “big bad.” He’s brutal and cruel, yes, but there’s also an underlying nuance to him that makes him mesmerizing. I also enjoyed getting to explore more of the political side of the Empire and how communities respond to their presence in more direct ways. It makes the evil organization feel as grand as it really is and a far more menacing presence than the one that allowed a Death Star to blow up.

Despite knowing certain spoilers (most people would if they weren’t living under a rock the past 40 years), the impact of certain key moments are rewarding. There was a scene that made me tear up quite a lot and another where a character reaction made the movie feel more akin to horror than anything else. These aren’t feelings I felt in the previous film. Somehow, this movie managed to deliver these feelings in conjunction with the same sense of wonder and adventure from the past movie. The emotional resonance this movie creates is what makes it a true masterpiece.

REPORT CARD

TLDRThe Empire Strikes back might be one of the first times where I’ve thought a sequel was better than its predecessor. This film takes everything I loved about A New Hope and then decided to add more while fine tuning other elements.
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
1980, 1980s, C+, Grade, Horror, mystery, Past, Review, review-movie, slasher, Thriller, Year

Film Review: Friday the 13th – 1980

Leave a comment
Director(s)Sean S. Cunningham
Principal CastAdrienne King as Alice
Peter Brouwer as Steve
Laurie Bartram as Brenda
Kevin Bacon as Jack
Mark Nelson as Ned
Jeannine Taylor as Marcie
Robbi Morgan as Annie
Release Date1980
Language(s)English
Running Time 95 minutes
Report Card Click to go Review TLDR/Summary
The full moon appears.
The campers sing at Camp Crystal Lake in 1958.
Campers gather around the campfire while singing.
A POV shot through the the children’s cabins.
The moon gains prominence.
A young couple starts to make love while being watched by an outside party.
The couple is killed.
The camera freezes the frame on the victims face, pushes into it, and then fades to white.
The title screen breaks through the glass along with score.
The opening scene evokes shades of John Carpenter’s Halloween. A POV camera stands in for a killer who murders a couple after they’ve begun to intimate as the track whispers “ki-ki-ki-ma-ma-ma” in the background to the swell of an orchestra. It’s effective, to the point, and a perfect encapsulation of what the movie is about.

Clouds go over the full moon as the camera tracks down from the celestial object to a campground, Camp Crystal Lake. The year is 1958. People inside one of the cabins sing a cheery camp song. The film cuts away to an POV shot. It’s subject wades through the campground and looks at the children. Meanwhile, the cheery diegetic track gives way to a more foreboding non-diegetic set of orchestral noises accompanying a whisper-like chant: “ki-ki-ki-ma-ma ma”. The film cuts back to the cabin where the cheery song is being sang and the ominous track dissipates for a moment.

After the singing is done, two of the camp counselors sneak off to enjoy the indiscretions of youth. A close-up of the foreboding moon comes up for a brief moment before the film cuts back to the couple as they vacate to a empty cabin and go upstairs to enjoy more sensual pleasures. However, just as they start getting intimate, the film cuts back to the POV shot and its subject. The non-diegetic chant comes back in and continues to increase in intensity. Suddenly, the subject is face to face with the couple who realizes they’re being watched. The two of them get up and make some excuses to the figure – clearly someone they both know. However, the subject slashes and kills both of them. The camera pushes in on the final victim’s face, cementing the expression of fear before the screen dissolves into an intense flash of white light; the title card shoots forward and breaks the glass screen.

Now, the year is 1980 and the story picks up on a group of camp counselors who have been hired by the owner of the Camp Crystal Lake campground, Steve (Peter Brouwer) to help him with his attempt at re-opening the location. As each of the youthful characters makes their way towards the camp, they run into locals who inform them of site and its terrifying reputation. The townspeople try and warn the new counselors of previous incidents at the camp like a drowning in 1957 and the murders of 1958 to get the youthful bunch to quit, but the youngsters refuse and set-up shop at camp with Steve, getting the campsite ready for a grand re-opening. Unfortunately for them, the movie’s opening moments has informed the viewer of the threat of murderer, so the seeds for the carnage are now allowed to bloom.

If the structure of the opening feels familiar, it’s because the movie intentionally emulates the footsteps of John Carpenter’s seminal classic, Halloween. There’s a scene of conjugal innocence interrupted by a killer whose point-of-view becomes the camera’s view. There’s an iconic theme and music profile associated with the terror; composer Harry Manfredini’s “ki-ki-ki-ma-ma-ma” whisper replaces John Carpenter’s terrorizing synths. This is all intentional; director Sean Cunningham and screen-writer Victor Miller wrote the film explicitly to ride on Halloween’s success and capitalize on what they thought were its strong points for as cheap as possible. [1]Kennedy, M. (2019, December 7). How Halloween directly inspired Friday the 13th. ScreenRant. Retrieved October 2, 2021, from https://screenrant.com/halloween-movie-inspired-friday-the-13th-franchise/.

However, it’s precisely where the movie openings diverge from one another where the issues effecting Friday the 13th can be made clear. Halloween ends its opening sequence by revealing that its killer is a young boy, Michael, shocking the audience and setting it’s story’s dark tone. The film’s use of the P.O.V shot disguises the identity of the killer but reveals their modus operandi and points of focus. However, once the initial act of murder is done, the P.O.V shot is flipped to a traditional view of the subject and the viewer is aghast and made aware that the killer is not normal and is out of synch with the “morally righteous” world. Because the killer is treated as a heinous monster the film is able to focus less on developing their character; through just their screen presence, the killings are made terrifying enough and the tension stems from following the victims that have to deal with the killer who is beyond any reason or comprehension. This creates multiple points of interest and tension.

But Friday the 13th treats the identity of its killer as the driving force of the narrative, generating tension from the possibility of the killer being any of the characters. Yet, because the story gives no clues about the nature of the identity of the killer till late into the third act when the reveal is all but inevitable and also doesn’t make any of the victims interesting in their own right outside of being possible red herrings, there’s absolutely no narrative momentum. Given the movie’s release context and the nature of its killer, it makes sense that Miller wanted to ensure there was no chance the killer’s identity would be revealed. However, because the focus is so stringent on maintaining “perfect” mystery until the moment of the reveal, there’s no reason to care about the movie, sans bits of gory fun, until that moment happens. Naturally, this puts the brunt of the thematic and emotional weight of the narrative on the killer’s reveal and reasoning for acting as they did, but Friday the 13th’s set-up is convoluted to say the least and does not spend nearly enough time laying the seeds for these revelations to feel earned.

Even within the context of the violence, there’s no effort made at establishing any kind of clues regarding the killer’s psychological profile. While Halloween spends little time characterizing its killer, it does relish in showing off its killers macabre decisions to give the viewer room to think about the nature of the killer’s thoughts; there’s an unease generated by trying to and and eventually making sense of the grim choices being made. Friday the 13th doesn’t even try to show personality behind the butchering; while the nature of the kills sequences are all creative by the standards of the time, there’s no connective tissue between them that would lead even a diligent viewer to gleam any meaningful information about the killer’s identity or reasoning for acting in the way they do.

This means the movie, up till the killers reveal, is functionally irrelevant character interaction and nicely put together gore sequences. No character, sans the killer, has a motivation that the viewer can latch onto as a reason to root for anyone through their trials and tribulations. While the group of “protagonists”, though calling them that feels like a stretch in itself, is generally likable, nothing inventive or fruitful ever happens because of or between the characters to distinguish them in meaningful fashion. Unfortunately, this makes the murderous moments ones with low stakes and subsequently renders the characters’ deaths as nothing more than beautiful bits of carnage candy.

But even without stakes, delightful gore with no narrative fat is certainly appealing, depending on the viewer, in its own right and that’s what Friday the 13th excels at delivering. The characters become blood-soaked paintbrushes in makeup designerTom Savini’s hands, conjuring up visions of the macabre and grotesque. Cunningham relishes in the sensuality of the violence and setting up the bodies in cruel and tragic fashion. This effect is accentuated because the movie only shows a few of the murders; selective moments of mutilation engender a matrix of fear which makes the reveal of other bodies all the worse. Because the moments of brutality are incorporated selectively, they actually manage to be shocking. This is why in spite of being light on plot, the film still manages to unnerve. While the characters may not be all that relatable, the way their bodies are violated certainly makes one a bit squeamish concerning their own flesh. It’s no wonder then that in spite of its own inception as a Halloween clone, Friday the 13th has managed to leave its own indelible mark on the slasher genre, demonstrating that good enough gore can make up for a lot.

REPORT CARD

TLDRFriday the 13th functions more as a vehicle for slaughter than a deeper foray into the human condition, providing the audience little more than momentarily evocative carnage candy until the explosive reveal of the killer’s true identity and motivations. Though there’s little subtext and the mystery driving the heart of the story is unfairly withheld from the audience until its reveal, the ride the movie takes viewers is fun even decades after its initial release in theatres. For those fans looking for quick, brisk, and to the point slasher-fare, Friday the 13th more than holds up.
Rating7.4/10
GradeC+

Go to Page 2 for the spoiler discussion and more in-depth analysis.
Go to Page 3 to view this review’s progress report .

Pages: 1 2 3