CountVladDracula Reviews

Dead Boy Detectives (2024– )

Decent but flawed

[7/10 · 28 April 2024]

Dead boy Detectives review

Image I've watched all eight episodes of Dead Boy Detectives and it was a decent show. It's not something I may obsess over like The Sandman, or The Witcher, but it was decent.

Dead Boy Detectives is the story of Edwin Payne and Charles Rowland. Edwin was killed during a Satanic ritual in 1916. Charles died from hypothermia and internal bleeding after some bullies drove him into an ice-cold lake while throwing rocks at him.

(Note: That was not how Charles actually died in the source material. In the comics, Lucifer had quit and shut down Hell (the basis for the TV show Lucifer) so many evil souls returned to Earth, including the boys that sacrificed poor Edwin. They badly burnt Charles' back on a hot stove and Charles died from his injuries.)

The two ghosts decided to dedicate their afterlife solving mysteries to help other ghosts find peace. They are aided by psychic, Crystal Palace, who is haunted by her abusive ex-boyfriend who happens to be a demon.

Both Edwin Payne and Charles Rowland originated in Neil Gaiman's The Sandman: Season of Mists, The Sandman: Volume 4. Issue 25 of The Sandman comics, and within Act 2 of The Sandman audio drama.

The Dead Boy Detectives made their TV first appearance in Doom Patrol for HBO Max (now Max). During a shakeup at Max the show was moved over to Netflix as to better connect it with The Sandman since that is where they originated.

The show features different actors from the ones that played Charles and Edwin on Doom Patrol.

The Dead Boy Detectives is a decent show but ...it feels a bit like a CW teen drama. I had been told that some of the show's writers were originally writers for the CW... and it shows.

There are some deliberately surreal elements of the show that I think are a callback to their appearance in Doom Patrol.

I love the variety of supernatural entities in the show, including the appearance of two of Morpheus's siblings. Death and Despair.

The things I don't like about the show can be considered CW tropes or cliches. The angsty romances and unrequited love. The ham-fisted abusive ex metaphor between Crystal and David The Demon.

And of course the most tedious of CW tropes, the end of the episode pining and angst while a sad pop song plays in the background.

If you look past the CW-ness of it, the show is enjoyable.

The only other things I can complain about is the "connecting thread" subplot of The Afterlife: Lost and Found feels like unnecessary filler. And I wish they would openly establish that Edwin, being an innocent, would NOT return to Hell if collected by Death now. I don't think that should be left hanging over his head. Especially since we're supposed to see Death as a kind entity.

Also I think Charles says "Aces" a little too much. It's very distracting and makes me feel like the writers didn't know much late 80s English slang. It would be like if he was an American and they had him say "Radical" all the time. I get that it's kind of his catchphrase but it also got a bit annoying.

The parts I don't like are CW tropes and what I'd consider to be late 90s Vertigo edginess.

The thing I liked were plentiful though. The protagonists were and are likable. The ending is satisfying enough so that if there is only one season this was still good. I liked that it appears that one can ascend out of Hell after some self-reflection as is indicated by the boy Edwin confronted in Hell. The blue light was established to mean ascension, a good afterlife.

I also LOVE the opening credits theme music and animated sequence. It reminds me of the intro to Showtime's Creature Feature movies. (See the trailer for 2001's She Creature, not the 50s version. Watch the trailer at thirteen seconds in, on Youtube, and you'll see what I mean).

That's two Gothic themed shows from Netflix in the last two years with great opening credits sequences. The first being Wednesday. That one won Danny Elfman an Emmy.

It's funny, Wednesday and Dead Boy Detectives (which is a spin-off of The Sandman) have great opening credit intro sequences but The Sandman does not. Apparently Neil Gaiman was told people don't watch the opening credits anymore so The Sandman doesn't have them.

I feel we were cheated out of what could have been a great opening sequence for The Sandman.

Episodes 7 and 8 of Dead Boy Detectives were probably the best of the series. I liked it well enough that if Dead Boy Detectives gets renewed I'll happily watch season 2.

Monster Mash (2024)

Good, cheesy, fun!

[9/10 · 25 April 2024]

Last night I watched the new Asylum mockbuster, Monster Mash.

What is Asylum? And What is a Mockbuster? A Mockbuster is a low budget knock-off movie of a film that is either already a blcokbuster hit or anticipated to be a hit. When Pacific Rim came out Asylum released a Mockbuster called Atlantic Rim. When Dracula 2000 came out, Dracula 3000 aired on The Scifi Channel. When Morbius came out, Asylum made Dracula: The Original Living Vampire.

Sometimes the connection to the blockbuster they were "inspired by" is very slim.

Asylum was founded twenty-five-years-ago to make mockbusters of high budget, blockbuster, and mainstream scifi and horror films. A lot of Asylum's creations have been released on Syfy (Formerly the Scifi Channel) as Syfy original movies.

Most Asylum movies are either made-for-TV or direct to DVD / Blu Ray / Streaming.

One season of the Netflix incarnation of Mystery Science Theatre were all Asylum mockbusters.

This year there was a highly anticipated vampire movie called Abigail. The plot was about the daughter of a crime boss (heavily implied to be Dracula all along). The daughter gets kidnapped and it turns out her kidnappers are actually her intended victims.

So Asylum released their own Mockbuster called Monster Mash and managed to release it two weeks before Abigail came out.

And what a treat this Monster Mash was! It was so delightfully corny! So wonderfully bad. I actually loved it. This was a so-bad-it's-good movie.

There are other films called Monster Mash, including a semi-Juke Box musical. This is the only one from 2024.

I think I liked Asylum's Monster Mash more than the 2012 Dario Argento's Dracula, which until now, was my favorite campy, bad Dracula movie. My nickname for Dario Argento's Dracula is Mantis Drac because Dracula transforms into a giant female preying Mantis at one point with very low quality CG effects.

In Monster Mash, Dracula's daughter is kidnapped by Boris (A rather simple minded but sweet hearted Frankenstein monster) serving the evil Dr. Frankenstein, who wants to use Dracula's daughter as bait to lure out Dracula. Dr. Frankenstein is dying and wants to transfer his consciousness to a new monster, an utterly indestructible monster- supposedly. Dr. Frankenstein wants to use the parts of all the classic monsters including blood from Dracula, skin from The invisible Man, the heart of Rameses The Mummy, and the limbs of an immortal werewolf.

Werewolves in traditional folklore, and the original Universal monster movies actually were immortal except when it came to silver.

The movie has minimum gore and suspense (except perhaps where Dracula almost kills his daughter's slave girl). It's tame enough where I think it could work for a child's first introduction to the classic monsters in a horror setting. (You know, outside of cartoons like Hotel Transylvania).

I liked it a lot. For an Asylum film there was limited low-quality CG except once Dr. Frankenstein's creation came to life. That's when Asylum brought it its trademark low quality SFX.

The movie was not just a mockbuster of Abigail. It also felt like League of Extraordinary Gentlemen but with the classic monsters. There were aspects that reminded me of House of Frankenstein.

Dracula's daughter even had wanted a cure for her vampiric condition, like in the Universal monster movie, Dracula's daughter. There are a lot of nice, subtle, homages to classic monster movies.

You realize pretty fast that the classic monsters are the heroes of the story (even though Dracula does occasionally snack on a hapless damsel).

And I found myself delighted through the corny cheese. THIS is what Universal studios should have give us with their promised Dark Universe. THIS was a classic monsters version of Avengers and with the campy cheese of an asylum mockbuster it was actually fun. It was charming.

I usually have difficulty sitting through an Asylum mockbister, let alone want to watch it again. This one I would happily watch again. It was fun. It was cheesy, good, fun.

I liked it. I liked it a lot.

Honestly, the actor who played Dracula was so much fun in this, Asylum doesn't deserve him. He deserves to be in something better but man, he made the movie.

It was the sort of corny movie you might imagine Peter Vincent from the 1985 Fright Night starring in. Much like a classic Hammer Horror movie you can't quite tell what country it's set in or even what time period. There's almost a fairytale-like quality to it. An agelessness that is nostalgic and also refreshing.

This is, hands down, my favorite Asylum Mockbuster. Honestly, I loved it. If I had kids I'd have probably used it as their first horror film exposure to the classic movie monsters, not too scary, yet also well paced and the characters are likable.

It was cheesy, corny, fun. I want to see more monster movies like this. THIS is the sort of film Universal Studios Dark Universe should have produced for us. Somehow Asylum managed to give us what Universal should have. It's rare that I say something like this but Universal Studios take note. The low budget mockbuster did what you wanted to but could not.

I liked this so much I want Asylum to make a whole franchise out of it or even a TV series. I'd watch the Hell out of Dracula and his team of monsters trying to be the heroes. This was some damn good brain candy.

My harshest complaints are that I prefer articulate and intelligent Frankenstein monsters like in Mary Shelley's novel but as this creature was named Boris he's obviously a homage to the zeitgeist Universal Studios tropey idea of the Frankenstein Monster.

Also there's an odd moment where Dracula's daughter (named Elisabeta as a nod to the Bram Stoker's Dracula movie) comments about how she can read minds (with the aid of psychometry) but Dracula cannot read minds. I find this particularly odd since psychic abilities are some of his more common powers, even in films where they forget his ability to turn into Bat, wolf, and mist.

Other than these petty details I loved this movie. It was very bad but very fun, a deliciously cheesy monster movie.

Abigail (2024)

A fun return to Gothic Horror

[8/10 · 25 April 2024]

A few nights ago I watched the new vampire film Abigail.

It was a good vampire movie. There were some predictable moments and tropes that bordered on cliche but sometimes cliches are good. They're familiar and comfortable and it's fun to see those sort of trope-like manifestations in new or different situations from the norm. Cliches aren't bad by default. They can be fun. It all depends on how they are used.

Abigail was a good popcorn movie. It reminded me of vampire movies from the late-80s to early-90s.

Abigail deals with the little daughter of a crime boss who is implied to be Dracula himself. The hints of this fact are more subtle than in The Invitation (2022) but they are still there. The child is kidnapped by a ragtag group of would-be criminals eager to get rich quick. Little do they know this is actually a trap and they are the intended victims of this child vampire / hitman ...hitwoman.

The most sympathetic character in the movie is a recovering drug addict we come to know as Joey. She has an estranged relationship with her young son and she is actually very maternal and sympathetic to the vampire. She also has a Sherlock-like skill at deduction that is combined with genuine empathy for the emotions and situations of others. It's a cliche but it is so seldom used that it is has become a refreshing combination.

The ending is (to me) as strange yet satisfying as the Grandfather showing up at the end of Lost Boys. And there are a few funny quips in the movie.

I liked Abigail, I find little I would change about it other than be brave enough to acknowledge that the vampire father is Dracula and not just leave tiny breadcrumbs about it. I liked Abigail but I must confess I actually had more fun watching the Asylum mockbuster of Abigail, Monster Mash (2024 film) which was more of a low budget cross between Abigail, House of Frankenstein, and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen or eve Avengers.

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire, Abigail, Monster Mash... I am delighted to see so much spooky fun at the half-way -point to Halloween. This is usually the off-season for those sort of films. And I'm not complaining. As a Gothic Horror fan I love this. I love that they were brave enough to release these films in the spring instead of using the Halloween season as a crutch.

I am grateful for these films and the thorough end of the Twilight backlash. The annoying polarization of the pretty boy boy emo vampire vs. The mindless killing machine vampire has calmed down and returned to the traditional depictions of characters like Dracula in The Invitation, Renfield, Last Voyage of The Demeter, Monster Mash, and Abigail. Characters that are charming yet fiercely predatory.

I am grateful for this shift back in the vampire-sub genre of Gothic Horror. And also the return of acknowledging Dracula's more traditional powers such as shapeshifting into a bat or wolf or mist.

I am finding all of these new movies very satisfying. And I will likely watch Abigail again with friends to enjoy the vampiric (and slightly ham-fisted) allegory on Then There were none.

Credit where credit is due, I previously came across a werewolf version of "And then there were none" (The Beast Must Die from 1974) and a previous vampire version of And then there were None novel "Dying of the Light" by William Massa.

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire (2024)

Not as good as Afterlife but still fun

[8/10 · 23 March 2024]

I saw Ghostbusters Frozen Empire last night. And here is my review.

It was decent but very flawed. I will list the flaws first to get them over with while I'm thinking about it.

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire is the fourth film in the original Ghostbusters franchise. It mostly deals with an ancient God getting unleashed. It's kind of ironic that the first heavy snow for most of the US came on the night of this movie's release.

There are many things I love about the film and I will list those last. First let's get the negative out of the way. The first is the script feels a bit confused. Some wording doesn't quite make sense, like multiple writers were trying to put the script together and didn't communicate well.

I'm not too keen on the reveal that the Containment unit (where they store the captured ghosts) is just a "giant ghost trap." Ghostbusters: Afterlife already dealt with a "giant ghost trap" and it was very different. I much prefer how it was handled in The Real Ghostbusters animated series where the interior of The Containment unit was like a pocket dimension or version of limbo.

I don't like the dismissive "It was the eighties. No one was thinking about the future." Yes, they were.

I also don't like that they talk about "disposing" of ghosts while in the next breath it's revealed that the "Disposing of" is placing them in a new, bigger containment unit (with an interior "The size of the American West.") Now that's more like the animated series version. But the wording "disposed of" is weird when you know they mean capture and transport.

I also felt there was a bit of queer baiting with Phoebe and Melody (the ghost she befriends). There are some moments where I felt it looked like they were about to kiss. Not only that but the way Melody was introduced was off putting for me. It was almost like the audience was supposed to briefly mistake her as Egon's ghost returning and you sense that Phoebe was disappointed that it was not him.

Patton Oswalt was mostly just a glorified cameo but at least he got to give useful information even if he was just an "exposition faery."

Slimer was mostly there just to eat the other ghost called The Possessor. And how does a ghost eat another ghost? Even if Possessor was inside a pizza at the time. Wouldn't he just... go right through him? Since when is Slimer The Ghostbusters version of Kirby?

I also wish there was more use of pop and rock music like in the original first two Ghostbusters movies and the use of Cruel Summer in the first trailer for Ghostbusters Frozen Empire.

I also thought it was odd how easily Phoebe was tricked. I know a lot of intelligent people can be very naive but this was more than naive. It was a lampshaded (because the movie addreses how foolish she felt) "Plot induced stupidity."

My final complaint was Phoebe's (implied to be right) deduction that when a ghost settles their unfinished business and finds peace the ghost's particle disperse and the ghost becomes "part of the fabric of the universe." Too me this gives too much certainty to one particular "This is what happens after we die." And much like the "disposed of" like this is sort of contradicted as well because several times it's also suggested that even the ghosts that find peace are in tact somewhere.

I also couldn't quite tell if Paul Rudd's character had married Egon's daughter or not. They're obviously a couple but did they marry? If it was confirmed or not I must have missed it. I do like that Phoebe did call him Dad near the end though. That was sweet.

There's a bit of a sloppiness to the writing.

It also felt like the story didn't really get going until about three fourths into the movie.

The writing is the weakest part of the movie but there were things and ideas that I did like. I love the idea of Winston essentially forming the Ghostbusters equivalent of The Men in Black (that's how it feels). I love his research facility. I love his tech. I love that Ray was more pro-active in this and Peter Venkman got some new, good one liners. And he actually got the function as a real (though still manipulative) parapsychologist.

I love the use of practical effects. I always welcome tactile, real, old fashioned special effects over CG.

I still think Phoebe is a fantastic character and love her.

I do like that the new containment unit is going to be more like the version from the animated series and take up the psychic equivalent of the American West. But I still don't understand why the first containment unit was reduced to having just been "a giant ghost trap."

I do like Winston as the Ghostbusters equivalent of Nick Fury.

And I also liked that the movie had a feel to it similar to an episode of The Real Ghostbusters animated series.

I am also glad for the established tradition that each movie now ends with the original Ghostbusters theme song. I hope they keep that up. It always makes me smile.

I liked it but I do think it's the weakest in the original franchise. Ghostbusters: Afterlife was better. As a Ghostbusters fan I won't say it was bad. I am likely to watch it again. And I still think it's better than Ghostbusters: Answer the Call. (Pretty much anything is better than that).

It's flawed but fun. It's just a decent popcorn movie.

And as a life-long Ghostbusters junkie I do hope more things come from this despite all the cynical articles saying to let the franchise die.

One article I saw whined about how they didn't know what demographic / target audience for the movie was. So? Who cares? I don't want a movie for a specific age group, gender, etc. I want a movie that multiple generations and people of all cultures can like. If I can say "Oh, this movie is for twelve-year-old boys." or "Oh, this is for thirty-something men." or "This is for college age women." i tend to get bored and see it as pandering. Just tell a good story and the audience will find it.

This isn't the best Ghostbusters movie ever made but it's not the worst either. It's just the weakest of the original continuity but it is still enjoyable. I liked it.

Five Nights at Freddy's (2023)

Very nostalgic

[8/10 · 4 November 2023]

Five Nights at Freddy's Movie review I just saw Five Nights at Freddy's.

It was campy, cheesy, and predictable. And you know what? I loved it. It was strangely nostalgic. I know that the film is based on a relatively recent horror video game franchise but it's very much stylized to resemble a horror film of the 1980s.

Not only was the pizza place and animatronics (modeled on Chuck. E. Cheese) nostalgic for the 1980s but there's a strategically limited use of technology in the movie, giving it a kind of timeless feel.

The repeated use of The Romantics song "Talking in your Sleep." also helped. The music definitely helps give it an 80s feel.

Spoilers below: The plot is this. A child predator killed a handful of children at the pizza restaurant. The bodies were never found. I'm sure it's not that big of a surprise to learn the children now possess the animatronics where their bodies were hidden.

The main character, Mike, is battling for custody for his kid sister. An unpleasant Aunt Jane has gone through unscrupulous means to try to claim Abby (the kid sister). Needless to say Jane and those working for Jane fall victim to the possessed animatronics.

Mike has PTSD because when he was twelve-years-old his kid brother was abducted (and his body was also never found).

Needless to say the man who killed the children who now possess the animatronics turns out to be the man who killed Mike's kid brother and he was manipulating the ghosts of his victims who could not remember how they had died.

As I said, it's cheesy good fun. There are a few jump scares (which used to annoy me as a kid). And there is that annoying strobe effect of flickering lights or faulty florescent lights but thankfully there weren't as many of those as I initially thought there would be.

I have epileptic and photophobic friends who can't handle those sort of strobe effects so I was a little worried they would not be able to enjoy the film.

It's a very far-fetched movie and full of 80s horror tropes but that's not a bd thing. The combination of nostalgia, familiarity, and predictability made it oddly enjoyable to watch.

If I wasn't already familiar with the video game franchise you'd think this was an 80s horror movie and that's actually a good thing. Even though the film is PG-13, there's enough death and creative film tricks where your imagination comes up with a lot of the horror.

Though we now know who killed Mike's brother (and he obviously plans to haunt one of the animatronics in death) I can't help but feel that there are a few unresolved plot threads such as what happened to Mike's brother? Is he also haunting the restaurant? Is he the cupcake?

I know the animatronics are supposed to resemble the ones from the video games, and they do. But I can't help but be bothered by how innately creepy they are. Animatronics can be creepy on their own. And if you know about how animatronics work you sit wondering "Are they skinned? Why do they have exposed joins and mechanisms? Doesn't that ruin the illusion that these are anthropomorphic animals?" I also love some of the cornier moments, such as how quickly Mike accepted "Okay, these robots are possessed by dead children..." It's a fun, cheesy, film. Blum House definitely knows what they're doing. They have brought back the type of horror films that were popular (and entertaining) from my childhood, even if they are shackled by the marketing demand for a PG-13 rating but I'm willing to argue that it doesn't need to be a higher rating than PG-13.

I liked this movie the way I liked the 2022 Dracula movie, The Invitation. It was campy but good.

It was refreshing to see the genre drifting away from Torture P0rn (not literal p0rn, just excessive gore that people seem overly happy to see).

And I am pretty sure Spirit Halloween will be Happy to start carrying Five Nights at Freddy's merchandise the way they already do for Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, It, and Trick 'r Treat.

My Adventures with Superman (2023– )

The best new version of Superman I've seen in decades!

[10/10 · 3 September 2023]

Review of Season 1 of My adventures with Superman:

I just got done watching the season finale of "My Adventures with Superman."

I really under-estimated this show when I saw the first teasers for it. I thought it would be a version of Superman for little kids. And though I think children can watch it, there is some very mature writing in this, the kind I haven't seen since Disney's Gargoyles.

It's wholesome, well-written, and most importantly it FEELS like Superman. It's not the cynical deconstruction that Zack Snyder did with man of steel. This is the traditional boy scout version of superman, the sort of hero I'd missed.

The art style resembles a Japanese anime but this show is actually American made. The movements of the characters are very fluid. There's a beauty to this animation. Superman's movements in flight are realistic and fluid. He appears like he's swimming.

Some of the antagonists have changed origins and are redesigned but these don't detract from it at all.

I love what they did with Jimmy Olsen, especially the nonchalant little twist they gave to his character at the end of the season finale. This is probably my favorite depiction of Jimmy Olsen in any Superman incarnation.

I was relieved that the show allowed Lois (and Jimmy) to learn Clark's secret identity pretty early on (Jimmy actually figured it out first). It wasn't drawn out. I think everyone was tired of Lois not knowing Clark's secret decades ago.

There is on-going story progression. And it's so wholesome, so hopeful and warm, it's strangely comforting. I hadn't seen a superhero show like this in a long time.

Though I liked the mid-90s Superman animated series, this has fast become my favorite version of Superman.

Neil Gaiman was right when he had said (over in Twitter when it was still Twitter) that Superman doesn't need to be changed for "modern audiences." You just need to let superman be superman in a modern setting. And that's what this show did and it works. No one is bored with the classic Superman when he is done right.

I'm not even that big of a fan of Superman (in general). But I an genuinely loving this show. It's so good.

I am not sure why Cartoon Network shows it during Adult Swim (It's adult content evening timeslot). It FEELS like a well-made version of Superman. And it's not overly mature with themes too intense for children. No, far from it. This is a GOOD version of Superman.

It keeps you on your toes. The main characters like Clark, Lois, Ma and Pa Kent are all true to the cultural collective idea of who they are and yet the show is different enough that old school fans of Superman won't get bored. It'll keep you on your toes because it deviates just enough.

Also people who aren't old school fans of superman should be able to follow it just fine.

This cartoon was surprisingly good. And it deserves more attention. I dare say that this version of Superman has the potential to become as iconic as the 90s Batman the animated series.

Haunted Mansion (2023)

Surprisingly decent

[8/10 · 29 July 2023]

Last night I saw Disney's The Haunted Mansion and it was surprisingly good.

The main antagonist is The Hatbox Ghost, whose real name is Aleister Crump. The first name is from Aleister Crowley, whom he has a similar, though loose, backstory. The surname is crom Rolly Crump, a Disney artist who helped design the Haunted Mansion Ride and a lot of its features. That was a nice homage.

There are lots of nods to the famous Disney Park ride and yes, Mr. Gracey is in it, but he's not as big a character as he was in the 2003 version with Eddie Murphy.

I'm not usually a big fan of Jared Leto or his questionable method acting. I have seen his "Joker" and his portrayal of Dr. Michael Morbius. But this was probably my favorite of his roles. I cannot tell if that was his voice or not as the Hatbox Ghost being processed to sound deeper and creepier or if it was someone else's voice. Either way it was really well done. And Jared Leto finally found a role where he is supposed to be a hammy creep.

I liked this version of the Haunted Mansion a lot more than the 2023 version with Eddie Murphy. There was a little more depth to this one. And more interesting characters rather than the cliche workaholic father. This version dealt a lot with themes of grief and yes, there is a bit of a found family in it.

My one complaint is something that happened with Madame Leota. In this version of the story Leota was trapped inside her own crystal ball by The Hatbox Ghost. Toward the end of the movie one of the protagonists uses a spell to free her but then shortly afterward Leota delivers the line "I can feel the spell fading and soon I will be returned to my crystal ball. It's not so bad. It's actually quite spacious in there." Why do this? The Hatbox Ghost was defeated. It doesn't make sense. There's no reason for her to have to return to the crystal ball. If it's about selling the merchandise there are plenty of scenes of her inside the crystal ball already.

It almost feels like this annoying detail (and the only part I don't like) was added by some bitter Disney employee who was angry he didn't get to keep Binx trapped as a cat for all eternity in Hocus Pocus.

In general it was a fun movie. That bit about Leota having to return to her crystal ball was the only part that bothered me.

I do think this may have been strategically released toward the end of July in the hope of recreating the cult classic that emerged from Hocus Pocus- a rare Disney sleeper hit. Either that or Disney just had no faith in it because of the failing of the first attempt at a Haunted Mansion movie.

Based on the twelve week or so gap from theatrical release to home video Disney set this up so that it would be on DVD and Blu Ray and streaming just in time for the Halloween season.

This was a fun movie, not too scary, but horror enough that I think adults won't get bored. Some of the characters (including ghosts) could have been developed better though. Part of me hopes for a sequel while another part of me dreads the franchise being milked to the point of annoyance like the later Pirates of the Caribbean movies.

Also the reveal that Trevor's father was dead was easy to predict. But it is still a family film despite the PG-13 rating so some moments have to be easy for the kids to figure out. Not everything has to subvert expectations. And often subversion is done poorly in Hollywood anyway.

It was a fun film though. And some moments were genuinely sweet, such as the idea of ghosts sending small and subtle messages to loved ones like that cute cat, Tater Tot.

For those keeping score, there are now three Disney Haunted Mansion movies. There's The Haunted Mansion (2003), Muppet Haunted Mansion (2021), and Haunted Mansion (2023).

There's some good atmosphere in the movie too and some subtle homages to films like Poltergeist. I liked it.

The Canterville Ghost (2021)

Decent

[7/10 · 30 October 2022]

The Canterville Ghost (2021) Review:

I just got done watching The Canterville Ghost from 2021 and starring Anthony Head (Anthony Stewart Head to you Buffy The Vampire Slayer fans) as Sir Simon de Canterville.

I have seen many adaptations of Oscar Wilde's The Canterville Ghost. My favorite version is the 1996 version with Patrick Stewart as Sir Simon de Canterville. My least favorite version is the the one from the 1940s. A lot of people love that one but it was mostly war time propaganda. The original novella was written in the 1880s and certainly had no Nazis in it. Also the whole idea that Sir Simon de Canterville was walled up by his own father for refusing to take part in a duel that wasn't even his own - just to beg that same father for forgiveness later. That really did not sit right for me.

In the original Cantervlille Ghost novella Sir SImon de Canterville had murdered his wife and was doomed to haunt his manor until a prophecy was fulfilled including a child shedding tears for him and pleading his case to The Angel of Death.

In the novel he had pretty much resigned himself to his fate and a slightly annoying (but friendly) American family moved into the manor. The teenage daughter of the family, Virginia (known as Ginny) ended up being the child who would aid him lift the curse. She would also end up in a romance with a neighboring duke.

In this new version with Anthony Head as the ghost, Ginny is now a twenty-two-year-old law student and there are a few nice, clever, plot twists such as the reveal that the Otis family are actually sir Simon's direct descendants and it also turned out that this version of Sir SImon's biggest crime was actually turning away his Roma wife, whom he had handfasted with (unofficially married) to maintain his family's status. He had immediately regretted doing this and sought to set things right with her, with stolen family jewels, but he was caught by her brothers, who thought he had just left her to die in the cold- so they walled him up to starve in his family home.

This version of The Canterville Ghost borrows a lot of elements that were created for the 1996 version with Patrick Stewart such as giving Sir Simon a familiar (an animal companion). This version is a talking rat. The talking animal is a little jarring at first but I guess he's mostly there for comic relief and to remind you that this is (despite the ghost story) supposed to be a family-friendly mini-series.

This version was broken into a four part mini-series and... honestly it did not need to be four parts. There's one episode that is almost entirely set at a cricket game and the whole episode is pretty much filler.

There are two things I disliked about this mini-series (besides the cricket game that went on too long). The first being that SIr Simon makes repeated agist jokes about Ginny such as calling her a spinister, and "Past child bearing years." These jokes were... shall we say cringy, considering the version of Ginny in the original novella was only slightly younger than this version and she was called a "gentle girl" by Sir Simon in the original novella from 1880. This version of Ginny is twenty-two-years-old. It doesn't make sense that Virginia Otis is the focus for age-based barbs from Sir Simon. They aren't funny. I get that the writing is trying to poke fun of the agism of the era Sir Simon would have lived in but those jokes didn't even exist in the 1880s novella, in fact Oscar Wilde, in his writing, had a habit of considering twenty-somethings of men and women to still be children and he repeatedly called twenty-something men in The Picture of Dorian Gray "boy" and Virginia was referred to (in The Canterville Ghost novella) as a child, even though she was in her late teens in the original story.

The age jokes got tired fast. They felt as ...cringy and repetitive as the "child bearing hips" jokes in Tim Burton's comedy version of Dark Shadows. These jokes are jarring and don't really fit the story or how Sir Simon acts with other characters or even how he usually acts with Virginia.

Also pretty much all film versions of Sir Simon de Canterville (except the 1940s version...) are into Shakespeare. He must know The Merchant of Venice and yet he seems baffled by the idea of a woman defense attorney. The jokes about agism and sexism from his mortal life era got tired quick.

The second thing that bothered me about the mini-series was... the weird Americanisms. I say this as an American- the portrayal of American culture in this mini-series was weird. It was like it was written by a British teenager who had a strange, abstract, almost alien planet idea of what Americans are like based on outdated British TV show stereotypes. Yes, I admit many Americans would fly an American flag at the top of a British manor house but the Elvis impersonator singing The Monkee's "I'm a believer" was just odd. Also some of the supposedly American characters had awful, very fake sounding, accents. Why is it so many British people think America = Texas? Texas is the only place like Texas. The rest of the US is not like that, I promise.

At least they made up for this by making Mr. Otis (Virginia's father) extremely kind. A mellow, laid back, almost hippie type of character. He was extremely out going and kind even though he was a bit socially inept. They had managed to make him very likable.

The fact that twenty-two-year-old Virginia kept bringing up American laws as if they have any bearing in England with a sixteenth century Ghost also got a little annoying. She should have known better. And it just perpetuates the stereotype of American arrogance that we think American law applies everywhere in exactly the same way. Oh, that reminds me of something else that bothered me too. Virginia (who isn't even a full lawyer yet) apparently screwed up a case for an eighteen-year-old girl who was convicted of murdering her abusive stepfather. Virginia is told repeatedly that she is not at fault for this but it's never rectified. We're just casually told that there's this eighteen-year-old serving life in prison for murdering her abuser and it's never, ever set right. For a family movie that's quite dark. That bothered me.

They also somehow forgot that the stain on the floor was supposed to be the blood of Sir Simon's wife...

A petty detail about how Sir Simon's powers worked bugged me but not so much that it ruined the show. Sir Simon is slightly corporeal. That is to say he's made up of a very fine matter that disperses when he takes a mist-like form so he cannot actually pass through solid matter but rather tiny cracks and holes in this decorporealized form. I have used similar lore when role playing or writing for the character of Count Dracula on IMVU. It works for vampires that take mist form but but I don't think I really like it for ghosts. I've seen Anne Rice use a similar lore to account for how some of her spirits function but I still don't care for it.

Other than these two things I thought this was a fairly decent mini-series, probably in my top five favorite adaptations of The Canterville Ghost. Yes, I have seen that many versions as to have a top five list. And again, no, the 1940s version is not on that list. I liked the 1940s version of Oscar Wilde's The Picture of Dorian Gray, just not the 1940s version of The Canterville Ghost.

In the first episode I had thought they would draw out the parents not believing in ghosts and being skeptical for far, far too long but mercifully this was only in the first episode and they fast accepted that ghosts are most-assuredly real in his story.

The scene where Ginny had to plead Sir SImon's case and learn the true history behind him and his Roma wife's deaths felt weirdly like it had come out of Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett's Good Omens. A bureaucratic afterlife that is comical but darkly cold and cynical and detached where the "angels" and other entities seem to care more about protocol than about justice or love. I half expected to see Aziraphale and Crowley from Good Omens turn up.

This certainly was an interesting take on The Canterville Ghost. There were many times where it felt like Anthony Head was portraying Sir Simon as having a perpetual head-cold. And he certainly had an unusual choice in vocabulary. I still think Patrick Stewart did a better job as the ghost but Anthony Head was decent. And it had a good, satisfying ending.

The Invitation (II) (2022)

A good old-fashioned Gothic horror movie

[8/10 · 7 October 2022]

Last night I saw the new horror film The Invitation. And... I liked it. I liked it a lot actually. Yes, the full trailer does reveal most of the plot but it's actually really good. Yes, it is predicable and has some cliché tropes but that does not make it bad by default. It has excellent atmosphere and lots of wonderful homages to the Bram Stoker's Dracula (the original novel).

The Invitation from Sony Pictures actually feels like a 1960s Hammer Horror film. If not for the use of the Internet, DNA kit, and smartphones the plot could have easily come from a Hammer.

It's a pretty straight-forward plot. The main character is Evie. Her mother has just passed away so she decides to do a DNA kit to find out more about her ancestry. She discovers she's a part of an old British family line and is quickly invited to a wedding, all expenses paid. Here's where I reveal the "Surprise twist" that many vampire horror movie fans might catch on to right away. It turns out her family is one of three that serve as human vassals to the very real Count Dracula. He never directly calls himself Dracula but he does, at one point, say that he is known as "Son of the dragon" and liked that name and Evie responds with "That means you're..." It's never out right said out loud but it's there nevertheless. (For anyone reading this who doesn't know, Dracula means Son of the dragon or Son of The Devil, depending on the translation.)

There are so many "Hints" that he's Dracula that you have to have never heard of the character to not realize that's who this is. There's implications he's taken bat and wolf form (both off camera for obviously budgetary reasons), the manor house is called "New Carfax Abbey." (Carfax was the home Dracula bought when he moved to England in the original Dracula novel). He uses the alias DeVille (which is an alias Dracula used in Bram Stoker's novel.) There's even an elderly couple named Mina and Jonathan Harker (two of the protagonists of the original Dracula novel).

Anyway, the surprise twist is not just that this is a family serving Count Dracula but that Evie is to be the new bride to replace one that killed herself rather than take mortal life.

As someone who loves the original Dracula novel I do like that they follow the old rules of the story. For example Dracula doesn't burn in the sun. He's just nocturnal in nature and likely weaker by day. And when wounded or badly starved for blood he ages to the form of an elderly man. The actor for Dracula is a bit young (Dracula's more youthful form is usually about forty-five or forty-six-years-old based on the novel and Vlad the Impaler's age when he died and would have become the famous vampire. However he IS an excellent actor and does convey the right combination of charm and charisma as well as menacing and predatory behavior.

I dare say this is the best Vampire film I've seen since Let the Right One In (2008) and this is the best version of Dracula I've seen since Netflix's Castlevania. I still think Castlevania's Dracula is the best recent depiction of Dracula but this was a good one all the same.

I had not heard of The Invitation until very recently and I was not sure what I was really expecting other than an apparently very predictable plot and "twist" reveal but I was pleasantly surprised. For a low budget horror film it had some great ambiance and atmosphere. It has some excellent visuals and it feels old fashioned, in a good way. It did not rely heavily on "deconstruction" like a lot of other modern horror films. This was a true, old-fashioned Gothic Horror movie and I liked it.

My only complaints are the actor who plays Dracula is a bit younger than I'd like (though he plays the part well). There's a little bit of implied racism (as Evie is of mixed race) but it's not hamfisted. I do like that it's indicated that Dracula does take animal forms (You hear a wolf howl and you hear a bat) but because the film is low budget it is off-camera. I am glad they at least made the effort. Most modern vampire films (especially low budget ones) remove animal shape-shifting powers all together. I suppose my only real complain is one feeding scene has an obnoxious light flicker effect common in low budget horror films. This effect can induce headaches in some people or even seizures in epileptics. It's not scary. It's just cheap and inconsiderate. Other than that I loved the film though I will admit here I prefer the alternate ending (available to watch for free on Youtube).

After the disappointment that was the Interview with The Vampire TV series I actually really liked this movie much more than I expected. I recommend The Invitation to anyone who likes old fashioned Gothic Horror.

Hocus Pocus 2 (2022)

My review of Hocus Pocus 2

[7/10 · 2 October 2022]

I watched Hocus Pocus 2 a few days ago.

Like most Disney properties today there is a cynical sense of corporate oversight. I actually do love this movie but there's no mistaking some of the heavy handed actions of Disney overlords.

Hocus Pocus 2 begins with two teenage girls (I was mislead into thinking it would be three but the third doesn't join them until near the end) accidentally bringing The Sanderson Sisters back from the dead... again. The Sanderson Sisters are to Disney what Dracula was for Hammer Horror. They always come back.

I'll start with the negative and work my way out to the positive. There's a lot of positive. I actually really liked the movie.

A chunk of the movie (and even one of the end lines) felt like a shameless plug or out-right commercial for Walgreens. Yes, it was fun watching the three incompetent witches wandering a Walgreens like the deleted grocery store scene from the first movie (never released but clips of it and script exerts can be found online). But at the same time it felt like a commercial. A funny commercial but still a commercial.

I am glad they let the witches sing together twice. The Witches are Back (to the tune of Sir Elton John's The Bitch's back) was too short (in my opinion). They should have had a longer song for their revival. I am honestly a little surprised they didn't just make the whole film a musical. The director of the original Hocus Pocus did Newsies (a childhood favorite).

The new stage show scene where the witches sing a cover of Blondie's One way or Another (with a few lyrics changed) is extremely catchy. It's one of those songs that annoyingly gets stuck in your head.

To my surprise there was some nods to real modern day (non-Satanic) m magick and occultism. The mention of Maiden, Mother, and Crone, which used to just be subtly referenced with Winfried, Mary, and Sarah Sanderson is used genuinely here. And the use of salt to protect against dark magick (which is in the first film but used more in the second), as well as angelica leaves to lift hexes. And yes, some magick shops do offer Angelica leaves for free if someone thinks they've been cursed.

The story is predictable, sweet, and wholesome with themes about sisterly love, even with the Sanderson Sisters themselves. There were some minor retcons about the wtiches' backstory such as where Winifred got the book and Billy's relationship with her but both of those things had been told to us in the first film through hearsay so it makes sense that it wouldn't be accurate.

I actually thought it was a pleasant surprise to have Winifred Sanderson (Bette Midler) show genuine love for her sisters near the end, revealing that she would rather die than be without them. That was actually kind of sweet. And some part of me kind of wants to see a story where the Sanderson Sisters redeem themselves. They're bungling idiots as evil witches. Let's see them bungle their way through redemption.

It turns out the three teenage girls (one in particular) are destined to be a coven of good witches. You get a little backstory of Winifred and her sisters as children and Winifred is given her grimoire (spell book) by a witch in the woods. There are some subtle hints that this witch is their biological mother but nothing is confirmed. And upon first encounter the witch planned to feed on little Sarah's soul. This would be odd for a mother but considering things... she could be twisted enough to do it.

If you remember the first film there is a bit where the witches talk briefly about "Mummy scorpion pie" and it makes them think of mother. This suggests their mother is a witch so yes, I suspect the witch in the woods was their mother. The witch they meet also has the power to turn into a bird. I would like to see The Sanderson Sisters turn into animals. Winifred compared herself to a hawk, which would be ironic since the first film's anniversary edition said she has poor eyesight and hawks are known for their sight. And Mary already behaves very dog-like. She even barks and sniffs things out like a blood hound or wolf.

There are two hints for Hocus Pocus 3. The first is that the girls walk off with Winifred's spell book and a bird is following them. The bird very much looks like the one that turned into the witch that gave Winifred the spell book to begin with. I also will note that I think the main reason that witch forbid Winifred from casting the spell to make her all powerful is she knew it would cost her, her sisters. I think the witch-mother had cast the same spell once (which is why she's now immortal) and it had cost her her own coven. But if she had cast the spell why did she behave as if she was going to feed on little Sarah in the 1650s? A test to see if Winifred would protect her and thus a worthy coven leader?

Oh, there is also a nice homage to the 1960s Dark Shadows. A menacing Reverend Trask gives The Sanderson Sisters a hard time as children in the 1650s and his descendant (played by the same actor) exists in present day Salem as Mayor Traske (The poor guy just wanted a caramel apple through the whole movie. I felt bad for him). In the 60s TV show Dark Shadows, Reverend Trask was an eighteenth century witch hunter antagonist whose descendant (played by the same actor) was in present day Collinsport Maine. This was a clever homage for Dark Shadows fans. I wonder how many people even noticed it.

The math is a bit off for the Sanderson Sisters to be elderly in the 1690s. Based on the dates in the film Winifred should only be in her fifties in 1693. Bette Midler was forty-seven when she first played Winifred Sanderson in the first film and that was her look when she de-aged. She looked ninety or so at the very start before feeding on Emily Binx for youth so their childhooods should definitely have been before the 1650s but if you ignore this it's still a fun movie.

The second hint for Hocus Pocus 3 is the bonus scene after the end credits. Gilbert had apparently made a second black flame candle. Cobweb (his cat) shows it to us as a bonus scene.

I love Gilbert, by the way. A little self-serving but ultimately good, he is an occult expert and magick shoppe owner while also being a bit incompetent. I have a soft spot for incompetent sorcerers. I also liked the inversion that the girls were surprised and grossed out that he's not a virgin instead of like in the first movie where it was treated as a point of shame that the sixteen-year-old protagonist was still a virgin, a very odd thing for a Disney film.

Honestly, I wouldn't mind it if Hocus Pocus was continued as a TV series even if they had to use new actors for The Sanderson Sisters. The ones they used for the Disney World Spooktacular stage show every Halloween are decent.

To me The Sanderson Sisters are like Disney's version of The Wicked Witch of the West. Though bungling and Three Stooges-like they have become iconic and I think versions of them should walk around the Disney parks all year long, not just for Halloween. I think that the characters are popular enough that they can be used outside of the Halloween season.

I actually really liked Hocus Pocus 2 but then again I have a soft spot for The Sanderson sisters. I kind of hope they get a TV show or third movie and that they let it be a full on musical next time instead of just two songs per movie.

I had heard that there was a deleted scene of The Sanderson Sisters in purgatory. I hope Disney releases that deleted scene one day. Perhaps it tied to the recording studio bit on the end credits (where they again sing "The Witches are back.") Imagine that, a recording studio in purgatory.

I also heard the movie originally had a different ending but test audiences didn't like it so they had to go back and reshoot the ending back in June. The original filming was for three months in the autumn of 2021. I am curious to know what that original ending was though I do admit to thinking it was sweet, the ending we got, that Winifred would rather die than be without her sisters. That was actually endearing, the confirmation that she genuinely loves them. It makes them more likable antagonists, I think.

They definitely softened The Sanderson Sisters here in Hocus Pocus 2. In the first movie they were more violent and prone to killing. Here it felt like they just wanted power so it was less-evil. Part of me wouldn't be surprised if someone decided to give them a redemption story in show or movie form with The Witches are Back as the theme song.

It was cheesy but it was fun, just like the first Hocus Pocus movie. The first Hocus Pocus came out when I was eleven-years-old so you need to watch it with your mindset as that of a child. It helps you appreciate the sweet corniness of the over-all plot. It's delicious cheese. Embrace the cheese.

I'd say it's on par with the first Hocus Pocus movie. Not better but close. You have to appreciate both Hocus Pocus movies as cheesy, wholesome, Halloweeny fun. And yes, I would like some incarnation of The Sanderson Sisters all year long. I think Disney should consider making a show out of the characters if not the hinted at third movie.

Hell, maybe even a Maleficent / Hocus Pocus crossover. That would be fantastic. I adore Angelina Jolie's Maleficent. That's pretty much the only Angelina Jolie role I like. Imagine it, the dark faerie vs. The Sanderson sisters or having to work together for some reason.

Just don't be so blatant with the Walgreens commercial next time. That was shameless.

The Sandman (2022– )

I've waited years for this and was not disappointed

[10/10 · 10 August 2022]

My review of The Sandman Netflix series season 1:

(Contains some spoilers)

I have finally finished watching all of the first season of Neil Gaiman's The Sandman. This was the TV adaptation of the story that has fascinated me for the last five years. I gave myself a few days to sit on it and stew on what I thought of the show.

I loved most of it. I will give it an 8 out of 10. There were a few things I disliked but I mostly loved it. I loved Patton Oswalt as Matthew. I loved how Cain and Abel were portrayed. Any scene in The Dreaming was a delight. The special effects are excellent, as is the music.

Thought I loved the show I will acknowledge some flaws. Episode six is probably the best episode of the series and most people loved it for Death's story, The Sound of her Wings. But I loved it for the second half, which adapted the story Men of Good Fortune (chapter 10 of The Sandman audio drama, issue 13 in the comic book version). I love Men of Good Fortune so much that I wish it had gotten its own episode instead of just half of one. The character of the immortal Hob Gadling was done extremely well here. I love that he is the opposite of the popular trope of the brooding immortal. Instead he loves life. No matter how bad things get he never wants to die. There's too many new things to experience and enjoy and ways things can get better. I adore his optimism and endurance and I think Morpheus needs that in a friend. The ending of the episode is also very sweet.

Episodes 7 through 10 tell the story of The Doll's House and I'm afraid I did not like this portion of the show as much as the first half. I do actually like the new character of Gault used to replace the now absent Brute and Glob. Gault is a much more interesting character and helps to teach Morpheus about the way entities can change. She reminds me a lot of Ruin from The Dreaming: Waking Hours. I hope we see more of her later but even if we don't get more content with her, her story got a satisfying and endearing ending.

The Seral Killer convention was as dark and as brutal as the original version, if not more so. I was disappointed that Morpheus did not get to rescue Rose Walker from Funland but instead she was "rescued" by The Corinthian who wanted to use her power instead.

My complaints are relatively small. I happened to love the original version of Imperfect hosts where Morpheus convalesced in The House of Mystery, nursed back to health by the spooky, horror loving, Cain and Abel. Instead he comes to them to ask to take their Gargoyle (who was always more like a dog) and re-absorb the entity he had created in order to regain some power. This scene is gut wrenching, especially since Gregory does NOT die in the source material. He's an adorable recurring character along with Goldie the baby gargoyle.

I also didn't like that the show kind of thumbed its nose at the idea of Cain being apologetic or giving Goldie's egg to Abel, almost like it was a dig at the original story. I liked that moment of sweetness. Now it is Morpheus who gives them the egg that contains baby Goldie.

I do suspect that Morpheus giving them Goldie to make up for the loss of Gregory is meant to foreshadow the ultimate end of the series but Gregory and Goldie were always meant to co-exist with each other and their interactions were adorable. I hope I am right in that I thought I saw an unfinished re-created Gregory to the right of Morpheus at the end of episode 10. I also kind of hope that the series, itself, has a different ending from the original books. As blasphemous as this may sound I would prefer an ending that focusses on duality and change instead of "Change or die."

I was also a little disappointed that it was Lucienne who apparently made Matthew into a raven instead of Morpheus. I know Morpheus was still grieving Jessamy but it gave them more of a connection if Morpheus was who recruited the dying man to be his familiar. It was sort of funny that Matthew mentions not having thumbs anymore but I always had the impression that Matthew (in the books) preferred being a raven to a man so having him lament no longer having thumbs felt a little off to me.

Some of the changes were for the better. I am glad that John Dee spared Rosemary instead of killing her. I am glad Morpheus's "battle" with "The Oldest Game" was against Lucifer instead of the demon Choronzon. I am glad none of The Corinthian's victims were left alive for long, drawing out their mutilation and suffering. I am not a fan of torture or gore in horror. I like atmosphere more than anything. And The Sandman is both Gothic horror and fantasy and full of atmosphere.

In general I loved the show. I think I would have more of a grudge if Morpheus had not set things right with Gault in episode 10. What nearly became of her really bothered me even though she is a new character. And part of me still hopes that Alexander Burgess gets free of his curse much sooner than he did in the original version. The poor man had been through enough.

In general I was very happy with how the show turned out. I sincerely hope The Sandman gets a second season.

Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021)

A much better film than the 2016 film

[9/10 · 21 November 2021]

Warning: There will be spoilers here.

I saw Ghostbusters Afterlife a few hours ago and ...I liked it. It was not perfect but I liked it very much. I do think it is far superior to Ghostbusters: Answer the Call (2016) but I would say it may be as good as Ghostbusters 2 (which I know is disliked by a lot of people but I was about seven-years-old when it came out and loved it).

Spoiler territory from here on: This is definitely the sweetest and most heartfelt Ghostbusters film. The main premise is already known. Egon Spangler has died. The opening scene is very blatantly his death even though his face is kept hidden. He is actually killed by a ghost when his elaborate trap fails. He hides a full ghosttrap under the florboards and then sits down to wait to die. It's probably the darkest and most gloomy Ghostbusters opening but it felt necessary.

His daughter (they never actually reveal who had a child with Egon or if he grew her in a test tube or what) and her two children, Pheobe and Trevor move to his old farm. There is some family resentment because Egon's daughter thought he abandoned them. It turns out he was trying to protect them and the world by preventing the return of Gozer.

My one complaint about the movie is that we are told that Egon took a bunch of Ghostbusters gear and abandoned the rest of the Ghostbusters team years earlier after he had ranted that the end was nigh and they didn't believe him. This is the part that bothers me. With what we know of their dynamic, after all they had been through- why would his fellow Ghostbusters not believe him? That part doesn't make sense.

The claims that the film is full of fan service are true. And yes, it is Nostalgia baiting. But so what? Why is this so terrible? Why is this frowned upon? It's the third film in the original Ghostbusters continuity. If there were no call backs or references to the previous films it wouldn't have a reason to exist.

Yes, it does need the previous original Ghostbusters movies "as a crutch" but that is because this is a sequel, it is a passing of the torch movie and it is a good one.

The one character that out-shines all the others is Phoebe, the implied (never actually stated) autistic granddaughter of Egon Spangler. She's pretty much the main protagonist. They did excellent casting with her. She even resembles Harold Ramis and not just because she has the same glasses. There were times this film was emotionally difficult to watch because Egon had always been my favorite Ghostbuster. He is who inspired me to study parapsychology into my adulthood. I grew up watching the movies and The Real Ghostbusters animated series and even Extreme Ghostbusters. And yes, this film puts the 2016 film to shame. I wish there had been a character like Phoebe when I had been a little girl. She reminds me a lot of me as a little girl except I was never an atheistic skeptic as she started out as. But once she loses that skepticism she really embraces her Spangler-heritage.

This film has a lot of heart. There are times where it feels they might be afraid to stray from the lore established in the first film- I would like to have seen something truly creative done with the mythology or ghosts. Muncher is very clearly Slimer 2.0. But what they use from the original lore is very well-handled (save for the original team having not believed Egon).

Toward the end you see Egon's ghost (who was a presence through the movie). He is silent but helpful and it's a very well done special effect and it is implied he is at peace and able to move on when the story is done after reconciling and being embraced by his estranged daughter. It was very sweet.

The original team do make an appearance right when they are most needed and there are two bonus scenes. I would like to believe Janine is the grandmother but there is nothing to suggest this other than the subtle implication that yes, she and Egon had been a couple.

I very much appreciate that the original theme (and not a cover) plays at the start of the end credits. This was followed by a song called Haunted House and to my surprise it was sung by Phoebe's actress.

It was nice to see that Winston had become the most successful of the group and was financially supporting the others. It was almost as good as him having become an Egyptologist in the video games. I'd like to pretend both are true, thus successfully (and justifiably) over-compensating for people thinking of him as a token character.

Paul Rudd's character, Grooberson, was very likable. I do sort of wish Egon's daughter was more fleshed out. The granddaughter, Phoeobe, is well developed but the mother, not-so-much. Her boredom and out-right resentment of science actually made it difficult to understand why she and Grooberson seemed to be attracted to each other. They could have done a better job to suggest that she actually did have a love of science, herself, but repressed it because of her resentment of her father not being there for them. I think that was what they were trying for.

But for all the film's flaws it was actually an exceptionally good movie. I think of it as being on par with Ghostbusters 2 (which I did not hate as some fans do). And definitely far superior to Ghostbusters 2016 AKA Ghostbusters: Answer the Call.

I think some of the negative reviews for the film are criticizing it for the wrong reasons- as if nostalgia is something vulgar and offensive. I also think some people don't want to admit that the 2016 film wasn't really all that good and want to pretend that this couldn't possibly be better (though it really, really was).

I honestly loved this movie. I thought it was sweet. It's flawed but sweet. I would like to know who was the mother of Egon's daughter. Does she have a mother? Was it Janine? And I am still bothered that the original Ghostbusters team did not believe Egon's warnings. That feels out of character for them. But at least they apologize to him toward the end for it. It's a sweet film and it is very respectful to the original movies.

Some people have suggested that the second film in the Ghostbusters franchise is being ignored. This is not necessarily true. Ray's bookstore exists and that was only established in the second film (not the first). Also they said that there hadn't been any ghost sightings in New York in nearly thirty years. Thirty years is closer to the second film than the first. The first film was thirty-eight-years-ago, not thirty. The second film was thirty-two-years-ago. Also one of the bonus scenes reveals that Peter and Dana are married, which was established in the second film's closing scene.

This is a good film and I think fans of the original Ghostbusters are likely to love it.

A Haunting: Spellbound (2007) Season 4, Episode 7

Hateful and bigoted

[1/10 · 18 April 2021]

This was the most hateful, antiquated, and bigoted episode of the "Haunting" series I had ever seen. I'm honestly surprised others never commented or drew attention to it before.

The whole episode demonizes Wicca, implying that a woman converting to Wicca was akin to her being possessed. Even her doing something as kind as hanging her son's cross on the wall inside her pentacle was treated like something sinister and menacing.

Not only was this episode culturally insensitive and ill-conceived it perpetuates a cruel ignorance that Wiccans should not have to deal with in the modern world. I know 2007 seems like a long time ago now but even at the time this was tasteless, ignorant, and insensitive to reality.

Try to imagine of she had been Jewish instead and it treated her religion like it might have been a demonic possession. Do you understand yet what the problem is here?

This episode disgusted me and turned me off for the entire series. It did no favors to the Wiccan community and helped perpetuate misinformation about the religion. It felt like Christian pandering and what's worse, it literally demonized another religion to do it.

Dracula (2020)

The lore makes no sense!

[1/10 · 8 January 2020]

I cannot put into words how much I hated this mini-series. I dread the impending and likely second season. The lore makes little to no sense. The character motivations are weak and questionable and there are plot holes big enough to drive a truck through. Let me give an example or two. Dracula stores his former victims in small crates in his castle. (Ripping off The Hunger) even though he can easily destroy them via staking (confirmed in episode 3. He doesn't care about them so why does he do it? Example 2. In episode 3 he's captured by an organisation whose sole purpose is to find and hold him. What do they do? They hand him a wifi compatible kindle, the wifi password is his own name and NO ONE notices him skyping?!??

Stick with Castlevania. That version of Dracula feels like Dracula.

The Lion King (2019)

Very disappointing.

[2/10 · 19 July 2019]

Where do I begin? First there seems to be no passion. No heart. Much like Beauty and The Beast and the Aladdin remake I almost think it's a conscious effort to be subpar so that people will appreciate the originals more.

The animals are supposedly photo-realistic but they barely look like they're actually there. At times Simba looks like he's floating. the movements are stiff and wooden.

Be Prepared sounds like a 1960s beat poem that is only sung for the last few minutes.

Can you feel the Love Tonight is sung in daylight...

It's kind of awful.

Batman vs Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2019 Video)

Wish this existed when I was a kid

[9/10 · 23 June 2019]

Batman vs. The Ninja Turtles: I watched Batman vs. the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles this morning. It was actually pretty good. The art style was slightly stylized and Batman had a 1970s character design with 1990s style voice work but once you get used to that you realize there are homages to many Batman and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles incarnations.

The writing is clever and full of loving homages. Sometimes the jokes are out-right silly, like the 1987 Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles while other times it's brutally serious. It's much more violent then you may expect. A human (not robot) foot soldier gets a ninja star to the head pretty early on. Donatello breaks an arm, and a security guard gets decapitated. Not to mention all of The Penguin's men get killed on screen. And Leonardo has graphic Scarecrow induced hallucinations about his brothers being pecked to death by crows and then their emaciated corpses turning into skeletons before crumbling into dust.

But it also has fun and cute moments such as Michelangelo fanboying over Batman and a few cute throw-back pizza scenes.

One of the best things about it is Troy Baker's voice work. Not only does he do a reasonable Kevin Conroy Batman impersonation but he also mimick's Mark Hamill's Joker really well.

The depiction of the Turtles themselves, Batman, and even The Shredder and Baxter are a hodgepodge of different incarnations of the characters. Batman is drawn like the 1970s version but speaks like the 1990s version and though Penguin looks like 1960s Penguin, he speaks with the voice of Penguin from The Batman (2000s animated series). The Turtles physically resemble the 2003 design but have the Turtle van and most of the behavior of the 1987 version. They refer to Splinter as their Father which is 2003 / 2012 Turtles but they quote their 1980s theme song. Most of their behavior matches the 80s version but Raphael is a little more hard edged and not merely the playful snark of the 80s version. Baxter is a fly-creature like in the 1980s Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles but he has a new design. and Ra's Al Ghul is clearly his 1990s design.

The movie also pokes fun of certain Batman tropes, like how there are random blimps all over Gotham.

Honestly I liked it more than I thought I would. I only wish this existed when I was a kid and could have appreciated it more as I loved both Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and Batman when I was about ten-years-old and used to fantasize about such crossovers including The Real Ghostbusters meeting The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles or Disney's Gargoyles. It's the sort of thing where my thoughts are "Where were you when I was a kid?"

Hellboy Animated: Blood and Iron (2007 TV Movie)

I love these animated movies.

[10/10 · 12 April 2019]

I suspect that a lot of people don't even realize that the Hellboy animated movies even exist at all.

There is Hellboy: Sword of Storms and Hellboy: Blood and Iron.

Both feature the voices of the actors from the original live action movies from director Guillermo del Toro. They were released direct to video in 2006 and had the potential to become a full scale animated series. Unfortunately that never happened.

I actually kind of like Blood and Iron a little more than Sword of storms bu both are still good. Besides the impressive voice cast, the art style resembles Mike Mignola's artwork, which is a very nice touch and shows respect for the comic book source material.

Hellboy Animated: Sword of Storms (2006 TV Movie)

I wish they made a full TV series out of this

[10/10 · 12 April 2019]

I think a lot of people don't know the Hellboy animated movies even exist. There is Hellboy: Sword of Storms and Hellboy: Blood and Iron. Both feature the voices of the actors from the original live action movies by director Guillermo del Toro. They were released direct to video in 2006 and had the potential to become a full scale animated series. Unfortunately that never happened.

Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008)

Hellboy 2 is very underrated

[10/10 · 12 April 2019]

I love this film. It's brilliantly acted with some darkness and just the right amount of whimsy and heart. Abe Sapien's love story is endearing nad very well acted. Luke Goss was fantastically cast as Prince Nuada. There is a certain sense of quality, effort, and depth in the original Hellboy movies that is utterly lacking in the remake.

Hellboy (2004)

I love this movie

[10/10 · 12 April 2019]

I love the original Hellboy and after watching that recent reboot I have learned not to take the original for granted. This is a beautifully done film and far better than it may first appear. Abe Sapien is my favorite character and he is brilliantly acted by Doug Jones.

Hellboy (2019)

I know I'm bias so...

[2/10 · 12 April 2019]

I admit my review is a little bias for two reasons. 1. I liked the original two Del Toro live action Hellboy movies and the two animated features they released. I feel that continuity should have been continued.

2. I am a fan of Abe Sapien. He is my favorite character and I hate that his only appearance was a brief cameo / teaser at the end.

This movie felt disjoined, ugly, and far too proud of it's R rating, as if it cared more about appealing to edgelord twelve-year-olds than actually telling a coherent story.

Pet Sematary (1989)

Never take a classic for granted

[10/10 · 7 April 2019]

A great film with a great soundtrack and memorable song. Never take it for granted. And always choose this before the remake. This one is the one that actually respects the source material.

Pet Sematary (2019)

Stick with the original.

[1/10 · 7 April 2019]

The first warning sign that the Pet Semetary Remake isn't very good... When you learn Stephen King, himself, suggested a different ending from what they filmed... Seriously, they took a King classic and gave it an ending worthy of a crappy Zombie Apocalypse movie. This is not a "reinterpretation." This wasn't "Changed for the modern audiences." It was just a shameless cash grab and I hate that there are people defending it.

Not to mention they changed which child died just for the sake of changing it to "keep the audience on their toes."

Doom Patrol (2019–2023)

I'm really loving this so far.

[10/10 · 10 March 2019]

I am really liking Doom Patrol so far. All the characters are relatable and sympathetic and dysfunctional. It's fun, quicky, and doesn't shy away from science and magick.

That's one thing DC has on Marvel. Marvel seems afraid to truly delve into its supernatural content but DC doesn't shy away from it at all.

I especially love Alan Tudyk. Alan Tudyk is fantastic as the narrator / Mr. Nobody. He has a theatrical flare that I dare say reminds me of Vincent Price. He also has a great sardonic delivery. If they ever adapt The House of Mystery or Neil Gaiman's Sandman he'd make a fantastic Cain.

Ghostbusters: Answer the Call (2016)

Stick with the original.

[1/10 · 8 March 2019]

This film wasn't feminist . It opens with a queef joke and our "geniuses" do things like licking their blaster (the intelligent one shouldn't be doing things like that). Also destroying ghosts should not be possible and really rubbed me the wrong way, I preferred when they were captured. The original was funny but had it's serious points, like Buffy The Vampire Slayer TV series. It also had a lot more respect to real parapsychology.