Tag Archives: Horror

Review: Jennifer’s Body

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 .

Review: The Invisible Man (2020)

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 .

 

Review: The Invisible Man (1933)

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 .

Review: Upgrade

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 .

Review: The Void

Director(s)Steven Kostanski
Jeremy Gillespie
Principal CastAaron Poole as Daniel
Kenneth Welsh as Dr.Richard Powell
Kathleen Munroe as Allison
Daniel Fathers as Vincent
Mik Byskov as Simon
Release Date 2016
Language(s)English
Running Time90 minutes

When a group of people find themselves trapped in an isolated hospital , surrounded on the outside by hooded cultists and on the inside by grotesque Lovecraftian abominations, they’re forced to work with each other to survive the night. Even though the resulting story feels a bit contrived and convenient in how it plays out, it’s a satisfying homage to 80’s B Horror movies and knocks it out of the ballpark with its creatures effects. If you’ve been itching for cosmic horror that nails the aesthetic, this is it.

The movie shines when it comes to its presentation. It’s obvious how much effort when into the creature animatronics/effects. They’re dripping with that otherworldly dread that manages to get under your skin. The camera doesn’t shy away from showing these mangled monstrosities in all their glory. They’re not hidden away in the shadows or obfuscated by some lighting/visual effect. Likewise the makeup/prosthetic work done for the antagonist is captivating and perfectly feels otherworldly but serious. Once the third act starts, things just go fully bonkers and it’s a joy to watch the chaos unfold on the screen. There’s always something that catches your eye in how strange or revolting it looks. I’m not lying when I say that the aesthetic work here is on par with The Thing, and if that’s not an endorsement nothing is.

The story oozes with mystery from the way that character relationships are revealed to the meaning of certain images/visual motifs. It’s cool and provides for interesting discussion afterwards, but I thought that the story was missing too much of a solid base for the mystery to add nuance. The movie flirts with ideas about death ,rebirth, and moving forward but they’re barely given anytime to marinate , because they’re shrouded in imagery and never examined in a way that unfolds naturally. If the movie had spent just a few more moments explaining certain character decisions, then I think the the whole piece would have felt more connected in what it’s trying to accomplish. It’s not like the movie is shy about utilizing exposition. Most of the relationships between characters are told between strange expository dialogue and the majority of the “mystery” is revealed by the antagonist in the third act. However, in spite of giving us so much information, none of it ever amounts to anything that’d push the movie over the hump into something amazing. If you’re going to tell us this much, you might as well tell us just enough to feel like the story did it’s own unique thing. It’s a shame because I liked a lot of the surface level ideas the movie wanted to talk about but just couldn’t get into how vague and the sloppy the themes came across.

REPORT CARD

TLDRThe Void tells the story of a group of strangers who are forced to fend off a hooded cultists and Lovecraftian monsters. Thought the movie doesn’t push the genre forward and feels like it relies on mystery too much , it’s so visually stunning and well put together that you won’t find yourself nitpicking too much. This movie has some of the best creature effect work since John Carpenter’s The Thing, so if you’re looking for a fun and quick cosmic horror movie, look no further.
Rating8.1/10
Grade B

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

Review: The Neon Demon

Director(s)Nicolas Winding Refn
Principal CastElle Fanning as Jesse
Jena Malone as Ruby
Bella Heathcote as Gigi
Abbey Lee as Sarrah
Karl Glusman as Dean
Keanu Reeves as Hank
Release Date 2016
Language(s)English
Running Time117 minutes

The Neon Demon follows Jesse, an aspiring young model looking to make it big in Los Angeles. Armed with only her beauty and charm, the budding star finds herself caught up in the machinations of an industry that simultaneously craves and detests the beauty she possesses. The movie deftly tackles exploitation, sexuality, beauty, and innocence in a way that brings lights the very real issues plaguing the fashion industry while offering a deep dive into the way humanity approaches beauty and aesthetic.

Jesse, on top of being the protagonist, is a stand in for beauty in a more metaphysical sense. Characters constantly talk about her attractive qualities, positioning themselves in relation to her on a spectrum ranging from deification to envy and hatred. It gives every interaction subtext about the way we perceive and interact with beauty, both in destructive and productive capacities. Some of us view beauty as invaluable as physical health, and as such, practices like plastic surgery are necessary to a “good” life. For others, beauty is vain and we should seek to move away from it. It’s all a question of what we think of ourselves. On top of that, we have to balance those ideas with how we think others view them as well. Each of these threads are explored in detail and in relation with one another culminating in a truly unique horror movie about the aspects of our relationship with beauty.

Speaking of beauty, the movie is mesmerizing to listen and watch. Shots are oozing with color and neon blues and reds are used to symbolize egoism and danger respectively. There are mirrors in almost every shot and they’re utilized in every way possible, from background props to make dialogue scenes more memorable to doorways for exploring the human condition. The way the movie is cut gives it a dream like feeling in key moments and adds a constant sense of tension in others. Refn knows how to play with expectations and uses editing misdirects to get memorable and well-earned scares. The movie is violent and gory, but only when it needs to be, so I didn’t think it came off as gratuitous. I got lost in every scene because of Cliff Martinez’s music. It’s synthy and hypnotic, completely lulling you into the energy of whatever is happening on screen. I felt scared, excited, wanted to dance, and completely got into the zone. There’s a lot of range in the music and it’s on of the best soundtracks I’ve heard in a movie. The sound editing is also on point and there’s not always music blaring, despite the obvious opportunities for it. When it suits the movie, silence and a distinct chime motif are used to thematically link pieces and add more tension. Put together, it’s an audio-visual experience that’s hard to beat. It knows when to assault the senses and when to hold back for the right moment.

Every performance is on point, but Fanning really shines as the lead of this giallo (big Suspiria vibes) inspired trip through the fashion industry. She starts off innocent and timid trying to find her footing. Never once does she feel manipulative or like an annoying goody two shoes. Instead, she feels almost like beauty personified, trying to make it in a cutthroat industry with only her looks at her side. Watching her transform into a more confident, narcissistic individual is harrowing but entertaining, because it feels natural from a storytelling/psychological perspective and supernatural from a thematic perspective.

My problems with the movie have to do more with the execution of the third act. There’s a lot of grounded realism in the first two acts with some more surreal elements, but by the time the third act rolls around it feels like a total switch. The story just starts going and gets really…. wow. It’s certainly effective and memorable, but I thought that it came off as too allegorical instead of balanced like story had been up to that point.

REPORT CARD

TLDRThe Neon Demon is a psychological horror movie about the awful things that await a young model with big aspirations in Los Angeles and as an allegory about humanity’s relationship with beauty wrapped up in a slick neon infused color palette and an synthy mesmerizing soundtrack. If you like more surreal horror that focuses on atmosphere as opposed to jump scares or are interesting an fascinating take on narcissism, this is the movie for you.
Rating9.8/10
Grade A+

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

Review: The Devil’s Candy

Director(s)Sean Byrne
Principal CastEthan Embry as Jesse Hellman
Kiara Glasco as Zooey Hellman
Pruitt Taylor Vince as Ray Smilie
Shiri Appleby as Astrid Hellman
Release Date 2015
Language(s)English
Running Time79 minutes

Despite being only 79 minutes, Sean Byrne’s sophomore feature feels more cohesive and put together than most horror releases out there. The story follows the Hellman family who move at the behest of their patriarch, Jesse, a struggling painter trying to help his family’s financial situation. However, their new house is filled with a few surprises of its own and Jesse finds himself possessed by his work once the movie is done. His paintings go from cute butterflies to horrific hellscapes and he becomes completely lost in his art, unable to process how long he’s been at the canvas. As he struggles to balance his work with his family he finds out that there’s also a potential killer on the loose and is forced to navigate increasingly more worrisome situations.

I love the family dynamic between the Hellman’s. It comes off as authentic and textured and you can tell exactly how each member operates in relation to the others. Both Jesse and his daughter, Zooey are charmed metal-heads while his wife (and primary source of family finances), Astrid, prefers more calming music. Watching Jesse and Zooey interact with other is heartwarming. It helps that Glasco and Embry play so well off each other. The latter comes off as a doting father, trying to find balance between his work life, duties to the family, and sense of artistic integrity. The former comes off as a playful kid, innocent to the harsh realities of the world but not stupid. When things start going wrong, the family dynamic is tested in ways that are both viscerally satisfying and thematically resonant. No dispute ever feels forced for the sake of generating conflict. It helps keep the movie feeling like a tight-knit package.

At the heart of the movie is a discussion of art, its inspirations, and the maddening way it can consume us if we let it. I love how it’s juxtaposed to highlight its destructive capacity- both in how certain forms of art can be destructive, but also in that the pursuit of artistic excellence can leave one unable to fulfill their other duties, thereby destroying a subjects state of balance. Art can be conscious, but at some level flows from a libidinal well that subsumes every other aspect of action. If we’re not careful, we can lose ourselves in it.

The camera always has a purpose and I was surprised at how effectively Byrne uses it to convey different themes. For example, there’s a move in montage scene early on where each member of the family is moving boxes around. There are no “cuts” and the camera stays stationary as people fade in and out. However, when the sequence is done, a character moves towards the “camera’s” position, and it’s actually a photo of the family. It’s a neat moment that shows the family is an series of interconnected entities that makes up one whole.

Edits and inter-cuts between related scenes are used to create these awesome visual connections between different elements that give moments much darker undertones. It helps that the movie utilizes tons of beautiful symmetric shots with saturated colors that just pop out of the screen, almost screaming at you to pay attention. The darker more disturbing images are hard to get out of your head and I have to praise the art direction for being so macabre and ghoulish. It’s unnerving and gives the movie a unique flair.

My only big problem with the movie is the very end, which feels simultaneously tacked on but poetically beautiful in a way. It kind of comes out of nowhere, but I enjoyed it in how it ties certain thematic threads up. I do think if the movie had spent maybe 10 more minutes just building up the elements to the final sequence it would have been amazing, but the way it’s done right now feels like an incomplete thought tacked to an otherwise finely-tuned movie.

REPORT CARD

TLDRThe Devil’s Candy manages to blend family drama with intriguing scares and a narrative that’ll have you questioning what’s going on. Though the third act fumbles in some places, there’s more than enough visual flair and subtext to make up for it.
Rating9.2/10
Grade A

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

Review: Pyewacket

Director(s)Adam MacDonald
Principal CastNicole Munoz as Leah Reyes
Laurie Holden as Mrs.Reyes
Release Date 2017
Language(s)English
Running Time90 minutes

Pywacket takes a family drama about the agitations of growing up and dealing with grief and combines it with slow burn supernatural horror in an attempt to highlight the consequences of emotional decision making and communicative mishaps. After a series of tense and emotionally fueled agitations with her mother, Leah decides enough is enough and wishes for the former’s death. Unbeknownst to her, dark forces were listening and she’s forced deal with the consequences of her ill-begotten wish.

The story takes a while to build up and the supernatural elements don’t really ratchet up till the third act. The core of the movie is the drama between Leah and her mom and their inability to deal with the loss of their father/husband. Each party has valid grievances but can never find a way to gauge the other on it. Watching them struggle to communicate hits real emotional nerves because it feels so real. Their disagreements feel commonplace and easy to locate in our own lives. It also helps that Munoz and Holden bring vulnerability and volatility in all of their interactions, so its easy to get lost in the emotional ebb and flow at the heart of the movie.

Parent-children relationships always involve a level of friction because of the nature of the bond. Parents have to love and care for their children while maintaining their own well-being, and children have to listen to their parents, grow, and figure out their own path in the world. Clash is inevitable and sometimes when passions get too heated, we want awful things to happen to the other person. It’s scary to think about how dark our heads can go with enough stress and damage . Thankfully for us, the passions are usually momentary- fleeting moments of malevolence lost in transit. The reason the horror in Pyewacket works is because it forces us to confront our worst fears- what if that awful thing we wished on someone actually happened?

Unfortunately, as interesting as the concept of the movie is , it’s executed without a lot of creativity. Supernatural events happen whenever the story determines they’re convenient and nothing is ever that jarring as a visual scare. I’m someone who likes scary sequences to have some kind of purpose or explanation, but the malevolent entity in this movie just acts when it wants to in random ways, so its hard to distinguish it from other scary oddities in other movies. Like, Pywacket is a witch’s familiar. There’s so much potential there, and instead it’s just creepy supernatural entity #945. Now to Macdonald’s credit, the third act has some tense sequences and terrifying moments of realization at what’s actually going on, but it feels a bit formulaic given the cool set up the story has going for itself. Sure there are no jump scares, but there’s also not some batshit super fun absurd out there ending like The House of the Devil. That feels like a shame.

The movie also tries to incorporate Leah’s friends into different scenes but none of them feel fleshed out or close to her at all. I was left wondering how any of them were friends or what the dynamic between them was. Especially with how some of the scenes progressed, I figured that they would be better incorporated into the scares or the themes, but they’re just kind of cast aside.

REPORT CARD

TLDRPyewacket is family drama about grief amplified with supernatural consequences. It’s a story about the dangers of emotional decision-making and the pitfalls of not communicating effectively. If you’re okay with a slow burn without any huge visceral payoffs, this is the movie for you. It may flub the third act a bit, but it tackles some very real fears and issues we all thinnk about.
Rating8.2/10
Grade B

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

Review: The Similars

Director(s)Isaac Ezban
Principal CastGustavo Sanchez Parra as Ulises
Cassandra Ciangherotti as Irene
Humberto Busto as Alvaro
Carmen Beato as Gertrudis
Santiago Torres as Ignacio
Fernando Becerril as Martin
Catalina Salas as Rosa
Release Date2015
Language(s)Spanish
Running Time 90 minutes

When 7 people find themselves trapped in at a bus station during a hurricane, tensions run high as eerie disturbances racket up. As the characters get more desperate to leave the situation, they realize that an “illness” is slowly spreading, threatening to infect every member of the group. What follows is a series of harrowing encounters and communicative breakdowns as the group tries to figure out the best way to weather the storm- physical and supernatural.

I’ve seen a lot of reviews compare this to The Twilight Zone, and while I can certainly see the references (hell Ezban talks about how the show influenced him), the movie has its own distinct voice and flair. The first half of the movie is tinged with a sense of mystery as the different members of the group slowly make their way into the situation and introduce themselves. As things go wrong, it’s hard to determine exactly what’s happening and why what is happening is happening the way that it is. When answers are revealed, the movie takes on a more direct horror like feeling with some genuinely chilling scenes of violence. By the time the movie ends, the realization of what happened truly hits, and the piece shines as something unique.

The movie has a lot to do with difference and the way we categorize people based on our perspectives of the world and the levers of power we have access to. Character groupings/alliances constantly change as each member learns more about others or gains a tactical advantage that lets them dictate the group’s pace. It’s an interesting exploration of human social interaction and the horror comes from determining at exactly what point the parameters for those interactions break. Are people a reflection of our perception along with some identifiable “objective” knowledge or is everything really just a matter of perspective and power? It’s an interesting topic and the movie broaches it from a terrifying vantage point.

This is the first movie I’ve seen with such a desaturated color palette. I was sure it was black-and-white to begin with, but after a few scenes realized that there were tiny splotches of color everywhere. It gives the already dreary movie an even bleaker feeling. The movie is left feeling gray with slight signs of life, and that aesthetic perfectly compliments the subject matter. The practical effects/makeup department also deserves kudos for nailing the aesthetic of the horrifying transformation the characters are trying to avoid. It feels distinct and real enough to get under the skin, without being so over the top so as to distract from the situation.

Given that the story is set during the Mexican student protests of 1968, before the Tlatelolco massacre, I expected politics to be more of a major feature of the movie. It’s not that it’s not utilized. Story beats line up with the beats of the protests and the parallels between the situations are definitely there. Character’s make mention of the turmoil and it’s even featured on the radio. However, it’s kind of cast aside to the background of the story, as another general way we otherize/categorize people. Its utilization feels more generic which is a shame, because the tidbits of intersection we get between horror and politics is interesting to mull over. I only wish the movie took the next step.

REPORT CARD

TLDRThe Similiars feels like an episode of The Twilight Zone with a distinct Mexican flair and sense of intrigue. The story of individuals trapped in a bus station, unable to leave and desperate to avert a mystery illness should keep fans of the genre intrigued from start to finish. Though I wish the movie went farther in incorporating its distinct political setting into the story, its exploration of the human element and what makes relationships tick is more than interesting to mull about by itself.
Rating8.9/10
GradeB+

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

Review: The Love Witch

Director(s)Anna Biller
Principal CastSamantha Robinson as Elaine Parks
Laura Waddell as Trish
Jared Sanford as Gahan
Gian Keys as Griff
Release Date 2016
Language(s)English
Running Time120 minutes

In honor of Valentine’s day, I present my review of The Love Witch, a nuanced feminist story about love, gender, agency, desire, and their infinite intersections. The movie follows Elaine, a witch who moves to California in the hopes of finding someone to love. Once there, she uses magic and rituals to aid in her goal, but is met with comedic and tragic consequences.

I’m someone who loves feminism in media (when it’s done well) and Biller’s story masterfully navigates themes within the larger genre. At first it can feel like there are too many heavy-handed comments and not-so-subtle hints about what characters are thinking. However, by the end of the movie it’s obvious that a lot of what was said was done in an effort to control narrative sources of ambiguity and make discussion more interesting/accessible. If more people are on the same page about initial events and character motivations, then the subsequent discussion can go more in depth on the what actually matters- the themes.

The Love Witch analyzes the way desire and love are positioned by society and in relation to sex/gender. Elaine accepts her position as eye-candy and utilizes the adoration and affection she receives to try and find love, a reciprocal exchange in her mind. She gives men exactly what they think they want, in the hopes that it’ll get them to be what she needs them to, but is always met with some kind of issue. The men get too emotional and she can’t relate, or they’re touchy and she’s uncomfortable. Watching her navigate the matrix of power relations is interesting because of how she is forced to don her sexuality and make use of it simultaneously. She is shamed and praised and the movie presents her choice as a path, not the only option. The way she approaches love is juxtaposed with other views, culminating in a discussion that will leave you thinking about what love really is.

The movie never feels preachy because it excels in developing situations in multifaceted ways. There are women and men who do “good” and “bad” things. It’s all couched in your perspective of what proper behavior looks like. Thankfully, the movie does a good job in making you question those interpretations, and going through that journey ends up revealing a lot about your own biases. The real horror is discovering these aspects of ourselves/society and thinking about how deep they run in constructing the bounds of what is and isn’t permissible behavior.

I love how the movie integrates witches into the world, in an unique and wholly original package. Witchcraft exists as a kind of protected religion in this world. Witches go about everyday life wearing their witch garb, selling and buying witchcraft related products at stores, holding/attending witchcraft lessons/rituals, etc. It’s a realistic take that gives the movie its own personality while keeping the more supernatural elements grounded. The story’s take on magic,love magic in particular, allows for imaginative and hypnotic horror sequences and also serves to expand the layers of the themes. Costume and set design is pristine and ties everything together, radiating color and personality. Elaine’s house for example, is filled with beautiful art work and colors that leap out at you so there’s always something to look at when she’s working in there. This can be said for all the different environments the movie navigates, each bursting with personality and a bright eye-catching color palette. I found myself drawn into each scene, completely immersed by the beauty of what I was seeing.

REPORT CARD

TLDRThe Love Witch is a deep dive into the way we approach love and the methods by which society and gender determine the same. Despite feeling a bit heavy-handed with its dialogue, the movie isn’t preachy and manages to be visually stunning and thematically poignant. The story of a love-struck witch, desperate for a Prince Charming, willing to make use of her sexuality and prowess with spells to charm men is funny, visually intoxicating, scary, and innovative in how it flips the traditional final girl horror cliche. Highly recommend to fans of feminist media or anyone who wants a horror movie about love.
Rating9.7/10
Grade A+

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