Change Your Image
joe-collins91
Reviews
Saw X (2023)
The best Saw sequel to date.
It's been two decades since plucky Australian filmmaker James Wan introduced us to the twisted and visceral world of "Saw", a cautionary thriller that forced unlucky test subjects to attest for their sins in gruesome and imaginative ways. The very concept could have been woven from the same fabric as David Finchers masterpiece "Se7en", as Tobin Bells' "Jigsaw", a serial killer with a knack for dishing out just desserts, became one of the most iconic and charismatic villains to grace the silver screen. 20 years (and several mediocre sequels, reboots and spinoffs) later, we are back to basics with Saw X, a "midquel" that is sandwiched in between Saw and Saw II. Saw X feels very different from earlier films, despite the obvious similarities (and colour palettes) and is a true return to form for the series.
Unlike previous entries, we do not open with a centrepiece trap, and instead This is very much an origin story for legacy character John Kramer, and the focus is on his arc and profile. The film opens in a non-traditional way, as we see John struggling with a recent terminal cancer diagnosis, and we witness the toll this takes on him as a person. He begins attending support groups, conversing with fellow patients and the realisation that time is running out nurtures a desperation that we have not seen previously in the soft-spoken and optimistic Kramer. The veil is lifted on the "monster", and the emotional beats that play out as we see how vulnerable John really is, especially as up until now he was more of a "background" character (we only ever really got to spend time with John through voice recordings or flashback sequences, especially in later sequels). Here, Tobin Bell and John Kramer are centre stage. Bell is on screen for a majority of the runtime, and this plays to the films advantages, as it is his character who is the most interesting and mesmerising. At 81 years of age, Bell gives the performance of his lifetime, especially in the scenes where he gets to show raw emotion.
The traps, which were teased on trailers are as gory and gnarly as ever. One horrifying set piece which features severed limbs and bone marrow is particularly nasty, however in a franchise that is usually heavy on violence and bloodshed, the traps here take a back seat. In fact, it takes a good hour before we even see the first real trap, and that gives us time to learn more about what makes John Kramer tick. The main narrative centres on John travelling to Mexico for a last-resort life-altering surgery. The mysterious out-in-the-sticks clinic he attends is headed by the kindly Dr Cecelia Pederson and her crew of reassuring physicians, who assure John that this expensive treatment will miraculously cure Johns' cancer once and for all. When the surgical team do a bunk and it becomes apparent that the whole thing is a huge con to defraud the most vulnerable in society, John decides to use the limited time he has left to turn the tables on those who have wronged him in the worst way.
I really enjoyed the emphasis on dialogue and the heavy back-and-forth between John, his new "subjects" and series fan-favourite Shawnee Smith, who makes a well-applauded reappearance midway through the proceedings. This refreshing take on the Saw lore is welcomed, and having John and Amanda as ringleaders really heightens to emotion. Some of the best scenes in the whole film feature these two characters reiterating their respect and love for each other, especially when Amanda struggles to pull off the games in which she would later become infamous for. Here, she is as vulnerable as John, and her reaction towards one of the subjects (who we learn is a drug addict) is a huge turning point for the character. Shawnee Smith was incredible in Saw X, and she compliments Bell extremely well.
Another standout performance comes from the villainous Cecilia, played with vampy finesse by Synnøve Macody Lund. She is a despicable and nasty piece of work, and is perhaps truly the most evil and deserving Jigsaw "subject" to date. Her wickedness almost makes John and Amanda anti-heroes, and you'll almost certainly find yourself routing for them to succeed in their games.
To conclude, Saw X is the best Saw sequel to date. It has heart, emotion, a killer performance from Bell and Smith, great traps, yucky gore, a stunning soundtrack and it leaves you wanting more.
Scream VI (2023)
The best and most intense Scream since the original!
I am one of few who found the 2022 Scream reboot disappointing. Sure, it was meta and Jenna Ortega gave a noteworthy performance, but it was fairly formulaic, with the Radio Silence brothers closely mimicking the same beats as the 1996 original. It had some gnarly kills, and some of the "elevated horror" lampooning was mildly amusing, but the "big reveal" (perhaps the best part of any Scream movie) was obvious and the fan servicing was boldly apparent. For those reasons, I was skeptical when going into Scream VI, not least because it was rushed into production and dropped into cinemas just a year after Scream V. Imagine my surprise then, when Scream VI ends up not only surpassing its reboot in terms of quality, but actually becoming easily the best sequel since the Wes Craven OG. I know, right?!
This time around we see the return of Sam and Tara Carpenter (Melissa Berrera and Jenna Ortega) and the Meeks-Martin twins (Jasmine Savoy-Brown and Mason Gooding) who have upped sticks from Woodsboro and relocated to the Big Apple. Sam is still traumatised from the realisation that Billy Loomis is her father (and she is still haunted by visions of her deceased daddy), and on top of that is dealing with cruel online fan-speculation that she herself is the real perpetrator of the previous years Woodsboro murders (because, y'know she's the daughter of a notorious serial killer and all that). She decides to stay close to a nervous Tara who has enrolled at NYC's Blackmore University, along with Mindy and Chad (other survivors from Part V). Joining them are newcomers Navika (Devon Nekoda), Mindy's girlfriend, the sweet-natured Ethan (Jack Champion) and their friend Quinn (Liana Liberato). It isn't long before trouble follows the new-gen foursome, when a new Ghostface begins terrorising the streets of Manhattan, leaving a trail of bodies in his (or her, or their) wake as the killer starts to close in.
So, what makes this latest instalment so good? Firstly, using New York City as the new backdrop (it was actually filmed in Montreal, but that doesn't matter) has really opened up the possibility of some cool set pieces. Darkened alleyways? Check. Face-to-face Apartment buildings? Check. Claustrophobic Subway? Check check! The open world feels bolder, and having a killer on the loose in some pretty crowded locations gives the film a subverted edge. Scream 3 was set in Los Angeles, but most of the action took place on a closed film set. Here, we really get to see the many different locations where s*** hits the fan, and as a result the movie feels BIGGER. You've probably heard (from the cast and from advanced screenings) that this is the bloodiest and goriest film in the Scream franchise. To say that this Ghostface is the nastiest, most brutal and violent of them all would be an understatement. The kills in Scream VI go beyond a level that we've never seen before in this franchise. The screen is literally drenched in visceral gore, from the opening scene to the last act. If you want nasty kills, then you will love Scream VI. Speaking of that opening scene, I love how they did something different and unexpected, but still managed to deliver on the shocks. It is arguably the best opening since Drew Barrymore answered the phone in the original and it will leave you gasping and exasperated.
Performance wise, Mason Gooding and Jenna Ortega steal the show. The former because he gets a lot more to do and gives a charming performance and the latter because Ortega can deliver a powerhouse performance when wheeling through the emotions. Melissa Berrera has massively improved since the last outing, and her switch from caring sister to troubled martyr works brilliantly. Rounding off the cast is the return of both Courtney Cox and Hayden Panettiere), who are essentially now the "legacy characters". Cox gets a bigger role than Part V (she even gets one of the greatest scenes in the film when Ghostface dials her number) and Panettiere slots into the narrative beautifully (she was the fan-favourite in SCRE4M, so her return is welcomed).
If I had to give some constructive criticism, I'd say that the lack of series torch barer Neve Campbell is felt. Her absence is explained in a throwaway line, but not having her feature at all is disappointing (though understanding given the circumstances surrounding her series departure). The third-act and eventually unmasking is the least interesting part of the film, and like the last instalment is fairly obvious early on. The motive is hardly precious cargo either.
So, Scream VI. Is it a masterpiece? No. Is it a bloody good time? You betcha. I hope this franchise continues to grow, because Radio Silence and Spyglass are definitely on the right path.
Matilda: The Musical (2022)
Marvellous.
Matilda The Musical is an adaptation of Tim Minchins" stage show of the same name and not a remake of the 1996 film starring Mara Wilson or a direct adaptation of the book by Roald Dahl. This is the first thing to know, because this film is filled to the brim with musical numbers. It stars Stephen Graham, Emma Thompson, Lashana Lynch and Alisha Weir as Matilda and is directed by Matthew Warchus (who also helmed the play).
Adaptations of Roald Dahl stories tend to go one way. They are either wonderful (Fantastic Mr Fox, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory) or they end up being a convoluted and overstuffed exercise in mediocrity (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and 2020's The Witches). Matilda is one of the better known Dahl stories, because it resonates well with children. Scary, funny and filled with morals about goodness overcoming evil and finding hope in the darkest corners, it has delighted generations of children and their parents. The musical in particular has won countless awards and continues to draw people in their droves to witness the witty lyrics from comedian Tim Minchin. When it was announced that the stage play was to get a upgrade to live action film many people groaned. Images of James Cordon in tights wailing towards the moonlight a la Cats came to mind, but thankfully Matilda The Musical is surprisingly sweet and a whole lot of fun. Changes have been made from the source material and even the original play (some musical numbers have been omitted and others have been added to give the finish a nice theatrical polish), but for the most part the story follows the original narrative closely. Matilda Wormwood is a kind hearted 8 year old genius, who's parents don't appreciate her. In fact, they seldom acknowledge her presence at all and when they do it is often to remind her what an inconvenience she is. Instead, she turns to the stories in her books for comfort and uses her sharp wit to get her own back when the grownups around her are particularly horrd. Once the authorities realise that Matilda is not attending school she is packed off to Crunchem Hall, a building that better resembles The Clink. Here, she meets monstrous child-hating Headmistress Miss Trunchbull and the lovely free spirited teacher Miss Honey, who has a secret of her own. High jinks ensue when Matilda realises she has telekinetic powers.
POSITIVES: As this is an adaptation of the musical, everything feels bright and garish, from the costumes to the sets. The film definitely has a "popping" feel to it, akin to Dr Seuss book. The musical numbers are whimsical and the choreography is finely polished and a lot of fun. All of the dancers and supporting cast do a great job and it is obvious that everyone is having a lot of fun with it. Alisha Weir as Matilda is wonderful, and she really carries the film at times. She feels like a real person rather than a caricature and her vocal ability is impressive. Lashana Lynch as Miss Honey is also delightful. Sickly sweet but nuanced with a hint of sadness, she balances Emma Thompson as the tyrannical Trunchbull. Thompson is a force to be reckoned with, despite the obvious comparisons with the genuinely unnerving performance by Pam Ferris in the 1996 adaptation. She still manages to make the character her own (a shame she has been stuffed into a fat suit and made to wear cartoonish prosthetics). The central performances are good all round and despite being lighter in tone than previous versions, I imagine that most people will really enjoy watching this on the big screen.
CONS: Condensing a 3 hour musical (with interval) into a slightly-under 2 hour film (with credits) means that inevitably some things are going to be lost, such as lines of dialogue or musical numbers and that is the case with Matilda. It doesn't detract too much, especially if you haven't already seen the stage version, but diehard Matilda fanatics will no doubt pick up on the condensed runtime. Because of this, some plot points or characterisations have been altered or removed, making relationships seem rushed. The bond between Matilda and Miss Honey for example feels a bit like an afterthought when it should be central to the plot. Instead we get more emphasis on the librarian character (a minor character in previous adaptations). The usually brilliant Stephen Graham and Andrea Riseborough feel underused as the ghastly parents (especially when compared to Danny DeVito and Rhea Pearlman who gave the 1996 version many of its comedy beats). The antagonists feel uniformly cartoonish, which is an odd tonal choice when the protagonists are very much human and grounded in reality. It isn't too jarring but if you enjoy the book or the 1996 version then some of the more infantile sequences will stand out more. Perhaps garishness and slapstick work better on the stage? There are also a couple of scenes where it is obvious they used the dreaded green screen (a sequence with Matilda on the rooftop is blatant) and some of the CGI looks cheap (especially towards the end when the film flips to musical X Men).
FINAL THOUGHTS. Matilda The Musical The Movie is a great time for the whole family and it is a lot better than it has any right to be. Distinguishable enough from the 1996 film and a pleasant surprise for fans of the musical. It may miss the mark compared to some of the other adaptations of Dahls zany world, but there's great performances, musical numbers and a sprinkling of magic and comedy throughout. It's a marvellous film that will have you clapping and singing along.
Disenchanted (2022)
We waited 15 years for this?
Disenchanted is Disney's latest folly. The sequel to Enchanted is anything but and in this case the namesake fits the picture. I think the main problem is the lack of new ideas, which is what made Enchanted special in the first place. Instead of a fairytale princess living in the real world, this time we have the real world becoming a fairytale kingdom and its real life inhabitants becoming fairytale characters. Instead of Susan Sarandon as a vampy evil Queen we have Maya Rudolph as a less vampy and less evil Queen. Groundbreaking stuff. Amy Adams is as lovely as ever, but even she can't wring any laughs out of the melodramatic dud of a script. The original had a handful of toe tapping musical numbers that you remembered and loved, but Disenchanted has an over abundance of forgettable songs, and there are far too many of them. Seriously, ninety percent of the two hour runtime is characters randomly bursting into song and it really is grating.
A handful of characters from the first Enchanted make cameo appearances, and it's great to see and hear Idina Menzel actually singing a musical number, but it still feels like Disney are just ticking boxes for the sake of nostalgia. On top of all of this nonsense is a barrel full of cliches. Muddling up storylines from Cinderella, Snow White and Beauty and the Beast and then making Giselle an antagonist just makes the whole thing seem like a long number of half baked ideas that never really stick. Patrick Dempsey looks uncomfortable to be donning tights and playing the airhead Prince personae, he is also wasted and barely in it. Gabriella Baldacchino replaces Rachel Covey as Morgan and she does a decent job as the Cinderella character. She also has an amazing voice, but she doesn't get much to do apart from be a plain protagonist sleepwalking through the narrative.
Disenchanted isn't bad, but it is undeserving to be the long awaited sequel to one of Disney's' best surprise musical hits. The original was fresh, funny and lampooned the Disney catalogue with enough charm and wit to make it timeless and rewatchable. Disenchanted is a run-of-the-mill straight to TV sequel that mimicks the very tropes that the original made fun of. It's overly melodramatic, a tad tedious and unforgettable.
Hocus Pocus 2 (2022)
A hoot! More laughs than the original.
Hocus Pocus 2 has finally landed, just in time for Hallowe'en and unlike another other big recent Disney Plus release Pinocchio (which by now I hope you've forgotten) nostalgia wins this time around. The plot is pretty much rehashed from the first Hocus Pocus (a teenaged virgin lights the Black Flame Candle on All Hallows' Eve under a full moon and a coven of dastardly mischievous and deliciously evil witches are resurrected and summoned to wreck havoc on the inhabitants of Salem) but the sequel is given an updated twist. As much of a timeless classic as the original was, it is still hilarious to witness the Sanderson sisters traverse around Walgreens, interact with drag queens and come face to face with Siri ("there's a small lady trapped in that box Winnie!"). What is surprisingly about HP2 is the amount of heart that weaves through the narrative. Sisterhood plays a big theme, and you may even find yourself empathising with the sisters...it really gets you in the feels.
There is also a big musical number in the middle of the movie which is akin to the original (lots of amazing costumes, choreography and a show stealing performance from Middler) but the music is definitely toned down in this one, with more emphasis on plot and comedy.
As for the cast, the younger actors are mainly cutout and one note, but the performances are fine. Whitney Peake is a likeable young lead and she delivers a good and grounded performance amongst the madness, but it is Bette Midler, Sarah Jessica Parker and Kathy Najimy who steal the show (because of course they do). The trio feature far more predominantly this time around and they get to use their magic on a much more regular basis. There is even a prolonged epilogue which explains how the Sanderson sisters became a coven which sets the new story up perfectly.
The lead actresses look fantastic (who'd have thought that nearly three decades have passed since they donned the costumes?) and they give just as much energy as they did in the original. There are lots of throwbacks, nods and Easter eggs for diehard fans and at the same time newcomers will be enchanted with the laughs and frights that come in abundance.
There's also an open ending for another potential sequel. Let's hope it isn't another 29 years before we meet the Sanderson sisters again!
Scream (2022)
Finally, a Scream movie that lives up to the original!
Scream (or Scream 5) is co-directed by Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett, the duo better known as Radio Silence and is written by James Vanderbilt and Guy Busick. Kevin Williamson returned as Executive Producer for the latest instalment in the Scream franchise.
After much anticipation and a whole load of clever online marketing, we arrive at Scream 2022, the long-awaited sequel in a franchise that has been on a long hiatus since 2011. This is very much a sequel (or a requel, but we will get to that later) however unlike the previous instalments' narrative of social media obsession and jealousy, the main themes this time around are the importance of legacy characters, the smugness of elevated horror pictures and the toxicity of online fandoms. The movie opens with a throwback to the 1996 original, with Jenna Ortega taking on the Drew Barrymore role. You know the drill, a young female character is alone in the house and receives a menacing phone call from an unknown assailant, after which the female character must answer horror movie trivia questions to avoid being carved up, however unlike Casey Becker, who was a sucker for Halloween and the first A Nightmare on Elm Street, Ortegas' Tara Carpenter prefers more "mature" and "elevated" horror movies, such as The Babbadook and It Follows. In fact, she has a huge disdain for cheesy slasher films, and she isn't afraid to express these views to a slightly bemused Ghostface. This opening scene is very darkly comic and amusing, especially when Tara resorts to using Google to answer questions about the Stab franchise, to which she is definitely not a fan (she demands to be quizzed on The Witch or the aforementioned films, however Ghostface is having none of it). This is one example of where Scream 2022 plays the meta card to great effect. You have a smart young female character discussing the values of horror as though she is merely debating in an online forum of die-hard A24 horror fans. Ortega is sublime in the opening scene and her performance is one of the best in the entire franchise.
Her encounter with Ghostface introduces us to older sister Sam, played by Melissa Barrera and her goofy boyfriend Richie (Jack Quaid) who return to Woodsboro after it becomes apparent that a new killer has donned the Edvard Munch costume to begin a new reign of terror. Also in line to be sliced and diced are a group of wily and fresh-faced new teens, including Amber (Mikey Madison), Vince (Kyle Gallner), Wes (Dylan Minnette), Chad (Mason Gooding) and Mindy (Jasmin Savoy Brown). Each of the young actors gives a razor-sharp performance and Savoy Brown (best known for her performance in Yellowjackets) is especially wonderful as Mindy Meeks-Martin, the niece of Randy Meeks from the original Scream. Her deconstruction of horror tropes is hilarious and one particularly amusing scene in which her character yells at the TV for a character in the Stab franchise to "turn around" as the real-life Ghostface approaches her from behind the couch had me gleefully chuckling away. She is also portrayed as the franchises' first openly LGBTQ character, which is such a refreshing sentiment in 2022. Other standouts include Mason Gooding as Chad, the twin character of Mindy and nephew of Randy and Dylan Minette as the loveable but dorky Wes (a homage to original director Wes Craven, who sadly passed away in 2015 and to whom this film is dedicated). This cast of characters is all-knowing and offer up performances worthy of every earlier instalment.
Also returning to Woodsboro are the famous trio who have held the torch through four previous instalments. Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox and David Arquette are pretty much Scream royalty and despite their limited scree time this time around (Campbell and Cox appear only in the third act to kick some Ghostface ass) their presence delivers a whole bucket full of nostalgia, charm and wit. David Arquette in particular owns the movie in every scene he is in, and one particular sucker punch moment that brings his character arc full-circle will surely have longtime fans crying into their sleeves. It is also nice to see Marley Shelton returning as town Sheriff Judy Hicks, mother to Wes and still a badass. This time around she is given a weightier characterisation as opposed to the klutzy comic relief we saw in Scream 4, but her relationship with her son and her appreciation of the stakes a new killer poses on the town gives the movie some of its more emotional undertones.
One reason why people love the Scream movies, is because of the social commentary that drives the narrative in between the gruesome slayings. This time we get a critical analysis of online fandoms, and whether some communities are detrimental to the creative process of making a sequel in a beloved franchise. This is a bold and risky move, as Scream itself has a hugely passionate fan base, many of whom spend hours theorising the "how's" and the "whys" of the whodunnits, however the ribbing never feels like the joke is on us. The movie is laughing with us, not at us and that is very important in a universe where characters speak openly of their disdain for horror tropes. Also up for some lampooning is the fact that the latest Scream movie decided to drop the "5th instalment" tag from its title. Remember Stab, the film-within-a-film franchise that exist in the Screamverse? Well in the latest film we are introduced to "Stab 8" which is "directed by the guy who made Knives Out" and which "was released under the title Stab to try and sell itself as a requel" (a reboot/sequel). This ribbing as to why future franchise instalments (such as Halloween 2018 or the upcoming Texas Chainsaw) revert back to their original titles is another amusing anecdote that the young characters discuss amongst the bloodshed, and it raises a few knowing titters.
Speaking of bloodshed, the latest Scream is by far the bloodiest and most disturbing. There is a ferocity to the slayings with a side sprinkling of mean spiritedness that almost undermines the playfulness of some of the meta channeling. Scenes of characters being brutally and repeatedly stabbed in the face, set on fire, stomped on and shot at close range make this the most gruesome film in the whole franchise, and then some. It is about on par with Halloween Kills for brutality, so if that's your thing you will have a blast. There are also lots of jump scares scattered throughout, and most of them land with a thump. If you're a nervous patron then you'll definitely find Scream 2022 scarier than than previous two instalments. The rest of you will simply lap up the jolts of horror and gratuitous gore.
One thing that makes the Scream movies so much fun is the mystery or the "whodunnit"?. The big reveal comes in the third act, however there are more than a dozen red-herring moments peppered in to throw you off track. Any one of the new characters could be the killer, a trope which is played around with to great effect. The eventual reveal is great fun, and even if the motive is somewhat diluted (we've seen so much better in the franchise), the ties to earlier legacy characters is refreshing and the payoff is satisfying. I particularly enjoyed the link to a previous major antagonist in the series and how that link played a part in the new killing spree.
To conclude this gargantuan review, I can happily say that Scream 2022 lives up to the original. It reads like a love letter to the original, with enough meta humour, social commentary and thrilling chase and kill scenes to appease die-hard fans and new viewers to the franchise. Wes Craven would be proud.
Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)
Believe the hype. The BEST MCU movie!
Spider-Man: No Way Home is absolutely stunning. There is no other way to put it. Tom Holland carries a film full of veteran actors and delivers a sucker-punch of a performance that will make you laugh and cry buckets in equal measure. Lots of fan service for MCU and Spider-Man fans, complete with a bittersweet ending that will move most theatre goers, you just have to see the ending chapter of the Spider-Man trilogy. Absolutely awesome!
The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It (2021)
Nail biting suspense and in-your-faces scares makes this a worthy sequel
The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It is the third entry in The Conjuring film series (and the 8th part of The Conjuring Universe): Helmed by Michael Chaves, who directed The Curse of La Llorona (an earlier and less well-received spinoff). James Wan is a co-writer and executive producer for the first time so no doubt many critics will be keeping a keen eye on Chaves as he takes the series in a new direction.
The story is based on the case of Arne Cheyenne Johnson, a young man who murdered his landlord and claimed that demonic forces made him commit the act. Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson return as ghost-hunting supremes Ed and Lorraine Warren who set out to make sense of the case and prove that demons can and do in fact take possession of people whilst convincing the high court that supernatural forces can be used as mitigating circumstances.
The formula for the third entry moves away from the haunted house tropes that drove the narrative of the first two films and veers towards the possession court room drama/crime investigation and witchcraft theme and as such the film feels fresh (how many more times do we really want to see Ed and Lorraine poke around old and dusty houses?). Wilson and Farmiga prove once again that their presence is what makes these films so enjoyable and watchable. Amongst the jump scares and deafening score they offer substance and an element of humanity that really makes you root for their characters. This time around we learn even more about the Warrens, how they met and how these cases affect them on a physical and emotional level. Farmiga as Lorraine Warren in particular is put through the wringer and takes centre stage. A phenomenal performer who can act her way out of a paper bag, she offers one of the best character drives in the series.
After a particularly intense opening scene involving the exorcism of a young boy (with nods and throwbacks to William Peter Blatty's original Exorcist) complete with some body horror that would have Cronenberg wincing the story moves along swiftly onto the case of Johnson who believes that a demon is responsible for the downward spiral his life has taken. The same demon is alleged to have caused the possession of the young brother of his girlfriend and so Ed and Lorraine Warren are drafted in to solve the mystery. The set pieces are what you'd expect from The Conjuring universe, with the camera panning away in some dark and dimly lit basement or morgue before a big reveal that hits you square in the face like a crescendo. Unlike Chaves previous effort this one comes with greater care for the scares, with the tension mounted up to extreme lengths and therefore the payoff feel earned. The central performances also add a layer of craftsmanship which makes up for the cheapness of some of the earlier spinoff entries. Ruairi O'Connor gives a moody performance as Johnson and really captures the sense of dread and unnerving unknowing that befalls a character that faces a life behind bars if the burden of proof is not challenged. Alongside genre greats such as Wilson and Farmiga he more than carries the film when required to do so. The score from Joseph Bishara (who penned the score for both Conjuring films and Wan's other ghost spinner Insidious) is a powerhouse of orchestral greatness, with shrieking violins coming to life when the scares are meant to catch you off guard. The ingredients all form together to deliver yet another fantastic Conjuring film.
If I had to give some criticism then the ending is a little slapdash and the resolve is a little sloppy and the final antagonist isn't particularly scary, however by that point most people will be entirely entertained so you are likely to still come away smiling (or screaming).
Black Christmas (2019)
Completely inept feminist claptrap
The original Black Christmas is a cult favorite, if only because of Olivia Hussey and the little well-known anecdote that it inspired John Carpenter to write Halloween. Sadly, since the 70's the "teen slasher" genre has been done to death (no pun intended), and whilst films like You're Next and Happy Death Day attempt to breathe life into a stale formula, we haven't really seen a great slasher film this side of the noughties.
This brings us to 2019 and the latest Black Christmas remake, which desperately wants you to take notice of its existence. It wants you to know that it's sincere, and hip and "cool" because it taps into the feminist movement. The first remake of Black Christmas was torn apart by critics in 2006 for its gratuitous violence and paper-thin female characters. The latest remake, helmed by Sophia Takal (who also contributed to the screenplay) fixes that by giving the female characters empowerment and an agenda. Think Charlies Angels with a bit of When a Stranger Calls and half a dozen fairy lights thrown into a slop bucket and you sort of get the idea. I am all for strong female characters. Laurie Rhodes from the aforementioned Halloween and Ripley from Alien are just two classic examples of empowered female leads in a horror franchise. Both of these characters are constantly one step ahead of the (usually male) antagonist and it reminds us that female characters are not only equal to their counterparts, but they often become a force to be reckoned with.
Black Christmas (2019) spends so much time telling us that the female characters are awesome that it forgets to develop any of their actual character. Most of the female characters might as well be referred to as "Girl 1" and "Girl 2" because their sole reason for being on screen is to be quickly bumped off in festive fashion. In a film that is clearly influenced heavily by the MeToo movement, to have such weak characters is detrimental to the whole saccharine message the film wants to convey.The male characters, most of whom are Fraternity Jocks are presented as either creepy, misogynistic or both. This film wants us to root for the female characters by forcing us to swallow the idea that the male characters are all wicked and degrading jerks. There is even a jolly festive song about sexual assault thrown in for good measure. This all makes no sense when a film about empowerment of the gender resorts to doing the very thing it is supposedly criticizing to get its point across.
Of the film itself, Black Christmas (2019) is decidedly dull. The original was a creepy little penny-dreadful type chiller. The remake was gratuitous fluff but it at least gave gore-hounds something to lap up. This one is both bloodless (physically and metaphorically) and is about as scary as a Christmas candy cane. The script feels like something out of a high school amateur production and most of the cast overact and chew the scenery. To achieve a PG-13 rating the violence was toned down so much that this feels like something off The Haunting Hour. All of the kills are off screen and so much time is spent with long and drawn out conversations between the female leads that even the short running time seems to drag on, and on and on. The film takes itself far too seriously, but then pulls the rug from under our feet right at the end when the "twist" is revealed. I won't spoil what happens, but the supernatural element that they tacked on did not make any sense and just made the whole thing even more ridiculous.
Watch the original. Heck, even go back to the 2006 remake, but skip this turkey.
The Purge (2013)
Disappointing and Not What You Think
The Purge tells the story of a dystopian futuristic America, where vigilance is almost non existent and unemployment rates remain at a respectable 1%. The reason for this? Because every year, for a 12 hour period the government permits American citizens to ravage the streets, killing, raping and destroying anything and everything they desire. During this time, external aid is unavailable and all emergency services are suspended. This annual holiday is known as "the purge" as it encourages the elitist-sort to "purge" all their negative emotions and violent urges.
The Purge is the latest credit from Jason Blum, the man who brought us "Paranormal Activity" and last years "Sinister", both of which are highly entertaining and genuinely scary films. Therefore "The Purge" should be good. Unfortunately shooting a high concept sci-fi thriller on a shoe string budget and spending 90% of your budget on Ethan Hawke's hair ruins what could potentially have been one of the most interesting speculative horror films of the year.
With such a great, albeit it inconceivable and questionable premisis, you'd have thought that director James DeMonaco (probably best known for his writing credits on the awful Assault on Precinct 13 remake) had a little gem on his hands. The setup is fundamentally disturbing and chilling- a world where crime is legal for one night of the year would make for a highly interesting and entertaining narrative if done properly. But the problem with The Purge is it tries too hard to please and is no where near as effective or smart as it likes to think. Add to that a so-so home invasion plot thrown into the mix, which completely sidelines the awesome setup and you have a recipe for disappointment.
The film opens up nicely with an eerie title sequence which showcases how "the purge" plays out on the streets. From here though we are shoehorned into the claustrophobic life of James Sardin (Ethan Hawke) and his rich elitist family. Sandin designs and flogs "purge proof" home security systems to the neighbors and for this reason lives in an impressive lavish home himself. After a cliché ridden dinner party scene complete with flying insults about overage boyfriends, Sandin, his trophy wife Mary (Lena Heady) and their two rebellious teenagers Zoey (Adelaide Kane) and Charlie (Max Burkholder) prepare to settle down for the night, in order the wait out the annual "purge" which is about to commence. As Charlie questions the moral practice of such a disturbing concept (killing the needy to cleanse the streets) a stranger (Edwin Hodge) who is being pursued by a gang of masked vigilantes screams for help. Charlie, being the only compassionate character in the whole film decides to disarm the security system, allowing the bloodied stranger to take refuge in the family home. Meanwhile Zoey's creepy boyfriend sneaks into the house to pursue a conflict with her father. It's not long before the murderous mob, wearing masquerade-style garments traces the stranger to the family household. The charming but sinister leader of the mob (Rhys Wakefield) issues a chilling ultimatum to the family- hand over the stranger or they will break into the house and murder everyone inside.
From here follows a battle of morals, numerous chase sequences in darkened hallways and more jump scares than you can poke a stick at as cliché ridden plot points play out like a rusty video cassette. The final act consists of an action ridden shoot-em-up, and despite a few neat twists rattles along like an old ghost train, complete with fake manufactured scares. The whole idea of the "purge" is lost in the muddled home invasion plot and the numerous plot holes are so large that they could swallow up the house where this dull thriller is set. The cast do a reasonable job, but the script never allows for them to be more than two dimensional clichéd cutouts (the loyal husband, the "perfect" housewife, the rebellious kids etc) there's even a token black guy and a pantomime villain. Wakefield steals the show as the main antagonist (a performance reminiscent of Heath Ledgers smirking Joker) but it still doesn't distract from the fact that the concept is smothered by typical horror conventions. The ending is pretty shocking and unexpected (I wasn't expecting such a main character to be dispatched in such a cruel fashion) but the last 10 minutes cannot make up for the previous 75 which are mediocre to say the least.
Therefore The Purge is nothing more than a disappointing stretched out Twilight Zone, and even then it would be within the weaker of those episodes. Had the concept been properly explored (showing us the carnage in the streets, tieing up loose ends about the premisis etc) then The Purge may have been a highly entertaining and specualative thriller. As it stands, it is nothing more than your average teen slasher. Best avoided.
Piranha 3DD (2012)
Proof that one good bite doesn't necessarily deserve another
It has to be said- Piranha 3DD is probably the most overrated sequel ever put to film. In fact it is suggestible that Piranha 3DD steals crown from 2010's remake as most overrated summer blockbuster of the 21st century. Maybe its the fact that the studio kept yo-yoing around with release dates or the ratings board making a dogs dinner out of getting it out there, but 3DD definitely held peoples attention in the LOOOONG time it took to get it off the ground and into theaters.
This time around instead of artsy French director Alexandra Aja we have gore maestro John Gulager (Feast) in the directors chair and a team of Saw sequel writers drafted in to write the script. Scream queen Danielle Panabaker takes over from Shue as the protagonist and Rhames returns along with Christopher Lloyd and David Hasselhoff (?) for blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameos.
The storyline is dumb. Even more dumb than that of the first which told us that fresh water fish have been living in secret underwater caves for millions. This time we are told that the said fish have worked out how to travel through underground sewage systems and into drains and that is exactly what happens. Instead of the lake we have a water park setting called "Big Wet" This has to be the most unrealistic water park in the world because the life guards are pole dancers (hence the 3DD joke in the title)
Panabaker plays Maddy a marine biologist (oh what a surprise) who has returned to her home town for the summer. Apparently she owns the water park along with her Stepfather who is trying to restore tourism in the town (we are told that the events of Piranha 3D had an adverse effect on the popularity of the lake- are you surprised? no me neither.) Anyways after a few people go missing Maddy suspects that something is wrong and does some nose-poking. Cue piranha-in-your-face scene and soon Maddy comes to the realization that...wait for it...THE PIRANHA ARE BACK! If that isn't bad enough, a creepy Christopher Lloyd calls to inform Maddy that this time the Piranha can travel underground through sewage pipes and will soon work their way into the water park (I'm seriously not making this up)
Anyways we soon learn than people have been illegally tampering with the pipes that connect the water park to the lake (how ironic I hear you ask...well blame the writers they came up with this genius idea) and that by the time Maddy gets to the water park the fish carnage has already begun. Here The Hoff makes an appearance and delivers some good satire and he soon gets involved in the chaos though and sort of becomes an anti-hero. Rhames, scarred from his last encounter with the piranha goes all Samuel L Jackson-kick ass but you've already seen the famous hyped up leg rifle scene countless times in the trailers "bring me my legs!" so it doesn't really come as a surprise. Rhames is underused here and the scene is pretty mediocre.
The funniest scenes takes place no where near the water. Katrina Bowden and Jean-Luc Bilodeau are having sex and a piranha jumps out of her vagina and bites his manhood off (no I'm not making it up this really happens.) Later on in the film Bowden is reminiscent of the event "Something came out of my vagina and bit Josh's penis off." This is probably the funniest scene in the whole film but again most of it was featured in the trailer so you already know what is going to happen which is disappointing. Still that one liner had me in stitches.
Anyways there are a few gross out gags thrown in and more nudity than you can shake a stick at. The action scenes are great and the piranha look slightly less ropey however the gore is trimmed and diluted (which is disappointing) Panabaker is a decent actress but she is hard to take seriously as a marine biologist/business woman AND heroine. She is expected to carry a film when in reality she is just a moderately good B movie actress. Shue managed to carry Piranha due to her experience as a well respected actress. Panabaker seems uncomfortable and edgy trying to fill those shoes.
Ving Rhames and Christopher Lloyd reprise their roles but between them they probably clock around 60 seconds screen time. More time is given to the Hoff who steals the show entirely but the gimmick is short lived. The rest of the cast scream, splash, get naked and get eaten and there are no stand out performances. It is the writers however who should be hanging their heads with this one. The reason Piranha was so fun was because it didn't take itself seriously. Aja even got Richard Dreyfus to laugh at himself and the seriousness surrounding his Jaws fame, however Piranha 3DD is so aware of the success of the first film that it tries too hard to look good. It's an arrogant film that tries to be better than the original but ultimately falls flat due to too much time spent on trying to make an impossible storyline possible.
The acting is pretty atrocious and Gulager seems to have lost his touch. The special effects are still a bit "meh" The ending is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen in the theater. A couple of people shook their head and said "yeah right." You'll see what I mean. The ending also opens up the door for a second sequel (if they follow the storyline with what happens right at the very end of this then the third Piranha film will be a complete disaster.)
By all means go and see it. I know your curiosity will lead you there. Just don't expect anything other than mediocre.