I’m usually NOT a fan of found footage horror movies, but I was curious to check this one out when I discovered that it was made on a $15,000 budget and needed to see how writer-director Robbie Banfitch managed to pull this off. Also, the movie takes place in the Mojave Desert, which quite frankly, as much as I find it a very alluring place, it can also emote creepiness as so many people go missing there every year. In fact, it was the premise of one of my short stories, Comets Tear the Skies.
The simple plot is that a group of friends go to the desert to record a music video, and it doesn’t take long before things get really crazy and deadly. For the majority of the film, the viewer is as disorientated and terrified as Robbie wanders the desert in both total darkness and glaring sunlight. What we do see is a gory bloodfest and strange, tremors-like worms crawling around (are they aliens?). We’re never sure what exactly is going on, but what we do know is that our protagonist is in danger, and there’s no escaping the violent onslaught.
This is a strange, bloody cosmic horror in which there’s no moment of levity or respite for any of the people involved. In fact, the horror only continues to progress to the bloody finale that will finally show us what happened to Robbie’s friends, and ultimately what happens to him. Check this out if you love found footage, as this movie really does wonders with its limited budget and the writer/director’s experience, but still manages to create a very chilling movie.
*Thank you so much to Emma Griffiths & Cinedigm for an early screening of the movie.
DID YOU ENJOY WHAT YOU JUST READ? IF YES, THEN SUBSCRIBE TO THE BLOG, GIVE THE POST A LIKE, OR LEAVE A COMMENT! NEW POSTS ARE UP EVERY TUESDAY & THURSDAY!
Before Alanis, before Dolores, before Courtney – and all the rock girls of the 90s, there was only one singer that mattered to me and her name was Whitney. Her voice was unlike anyone else’s and sure, some will say that Mariah is a close substitute, but Whitney Houston was in a class of her own, which is why losing her was so tragic.
Biopics are always tricky. I honestly love biopics about musicians because watching someone you love to rise to the top and being inundated by their hits is always a fun time. But it’s always a challenge for the director to know what parts of a musician’s life are cinematic enough and finding the right actor to embody someone that has many fans is also difficult.
Having said that, I do think that Naomi Ackie had some huge boots to fill and she did her best to capture Whitney’s essence through mannerisms, accent, and demeanor. And although, Ackie can sing, the director opted to keep Whitney’s voice for the musical moments in the movie, although since Ackie’s voice is in Whitney’s range, she was able to sing in some moments like in the gospel choir, when Whitney was young, and still needed to refine her voice.
Ackie’s performance is spellbinding and for the duration of the film, the audience can suspend belief, and feel like Whitney is actually there with them. As a fan, it’s always a plunge into the dark when going to see a biopic because you hope that the film captures what that artist really means to you. I was happy to see that this biopic decided to be a celebration of Whitney’s life and talent rather than take the tragic route ala Blonde (thankfully!).
If you’re a Whitney fan, I suggest catching this movie as it delves not only into her early days but also doesn’t shy away from depicting her relationship with Robyn Crawford (NeFessa Williams). Since there’s so much material to cover, it’s hard for the movie to focus on every aspect of her life, or show what motherhood meant to her. But that’s always a difficult call for the director to make, what parts of a person’s life are best meant to be representative of them as a person? All in all, this is a fun film to watch if you like musician biopics and want to see a movie celebrating Whitney’s talent and incredible voice.
Now playing in theaters.
DID YOU ENJOY WHAT YOU JUST READ? IF YES, THEN SUBSCRIBE TO THE BLOG, GIVE THE POST A LIKE, OR LEAVE A COMMENT! NEW POSTS ARE UP EVERY TUESDAY & THURSDAY!
Fun fact: the first time I watched this film it was at an outdoor theatre sponsored by my local church (that year we had a hot young monk helping with the church’s fundraising and somehow got away with showing this film, The Ninth Gate, and Final Destination). Having said that, this movie was considered the hottest teen film at the time, as well as having one of the best soundtracks after Romeo + Juliet (and that one was hard to beat!).
The movie is a modern adaptation of the French novel, Dangerous Liaisons (a film was made in 1988 and now Starz recently did a series). So instead of being at a French court, Cruel Intentions bases itself on the lives of rich Manhattan kids, focusing on step-siblings Kathryn and Sebastian.
Kathryn is pissed off because her ex dumped her over the 4th of July weekend for a naive virgin, deeming her too “slutty” for him, and wants Sebastian to help her destroy her ex by corrupting his current girlfriend Cecile. But Sebastian, notorious for ruining the lives of young girls with his charm and sociopathic ways has his eyes set on virginal Annette. Kathryn wagers that he cannot seduce Annette and if she wins, she will get his retro Jaguar, however, if she were to lose, she alludes that she would be down to have anal sex – and thus the bet is made.
The movie opens with Placebo’s Every You, Every Me – and with lyrics such as, “Sucker love, I always find someone to bruise and leave behind,” it quickly captures the mood of this movie. Now, upon this second viewing (I never rewatched it after that time from the outdoor theatre) it’s pretty evident that Sarah Michelle Gellar (who played the manipulative Kathryn) essentially carried the movie with her boss girl ways, cold cruelty, and sensuality. Although every gal viewing this movie couldn’t help but to fall for Ryan Phillippe’s charming take on Sebastian. Rewatching the movie, I was quickly reminded of why at the time I didn’t find his character charming, and I soon realized upon my second viewing that the actor looked very similar to this guy from school (who yes was cute) but had this knack for always trying to pick me up or find ways to touch me that at the time I found annoying and borderline harassing.
The movie was massively successful, it earned $75 million out of a $10 million budget and at the time was one of the raciest teen films. Nowadays, we’re more used to series like Euphoria, so Cruel Intentions seems very tame in comparison, but overall, it’s still a fun movie and that’s mostly because of its talented cast and cool soundtrack (the best use of Bittersweet Symphony you’ll ever see onscreen). Some things are dated (such as gay shaming), but some things still speak true today (such as Kathryn’s frustration with having to keep up a fake facade in order to be liked because women get a bad rep when they admit to liking sex). Despite all the flashy fun that the movie delivers, it goes without saying that there are problematic moments such as homophobia, racial insensitivity, and downplaying sexual assault. It was a product of its time, but we shouldn’t overlook some of its problematic issues.
DID YOU ENJOY WHAT YOU JUST READ? IF YES, THEN SUBSCRIBE TO THE BLOG, GIVE THE POST A LIKE, OR LEAVE A COMMENT! NEW POSTS ARE UP EVERY TUESDAY & THURSDAY!
When child star Jupe was on set for the sitcom Gordy’s Home, the titular chimp went berserk when a balloon pops causing havoc on set, killing and mauling the actors and staff from the show. During Gordy’s violent moment, Jupe and the camera focus on a white shoe that belonged to Jupe’s TV sister, standing upright with a tiny spot of blood. Later in life, we notice that he keeps this shoe in a memorabilia room. Some have mentioned that the upright shoe could be a manifestation of a bad miracle. However, I think the upright shoe is a symbol for the saying, “Waiting for the other shoe to drop,” and in a way, Jupe has lived his whole life waiting for the other shoe to drop, and when it does drop, this time he isn’t so lucky as he was in ’98.
Animal Abuse in the Film Industry.
The theme of animal abuse in Nope was extraordinarily evident from the very beginning when the movie starts with sound footage of a chimp, Gordy becoming violent during a filmed sitcom episode. Soon after, we notice the film industry being just as careless with the horse Lucky, on the set of a commercial, despite OJ basically begging the white cast and crew to be mindful of the animal and not to do anything that may startle it. But they didn’t listen to him, thus resulting in Lucky kicking out – and the director firing both the horse and his handler OJ. The film in a way wanted to show what happens when humans try to tame animals that aren’t meant to be tamed, and that in the end, their true nature will come out and the humans will suffer for their arrogance.
The Meaning behind FE1111.
Angel’s truck has a sticker with FE (standing for Fry’s Electronics) while 1111 is a reference to Jeremiah 11:11 famously referenced in Jordan Peele’s sophomore film US. The biblical reference is, “Therefore this is what the Lord says: ‘I will bring on them a disaster they cannot escape. Although they cry out to me, I will not listen to them.’” Meaning that God has no intention of saving man for something they brought upon themselves (usually caused by the human obsession with greed and power).
DID YOU ENJOY WHAT YOU JUST READ? IF YES, THEN SUBSCRIBE TO THE BLOG, GIVE THE POST A LIKE, OR LEAVE A COMMENT! NEW POSTS ARE UP EVERY TUESDAY & THURSDAY!
Full disclosure, when I started reading the novel, I struggled with the first chapters because I found present Ani to be too fixated on looks and appearances, especially when it came to clothes and her views on marriage (when I read the book I was still unmarried and was annoyed that the character could be so judgmental on what was the perfect age to be married by). It wasn’t until we got to meet teen Ani (then known as TifAni) that I warmed up to the character and could feel like we actually had more in common than I would’ve anticipated. Having said this, at the time I really enjoyed the novel so when the film hit Netflix last week I quickly viewed it.
Maybe because the author, Jessica Knoll has written three books since Luckiest Girl Alive, but I felt like the screenplay for the film (also written by the author) managed to convey a powerful punch to the gut, in a way that the book didn’t (I much prefer the film’s ending than the book ending). The writing was raw, sharp, and went for the jugular, in other words, it doesn’t aim to please, rather it aims to seize what is rightfully theirs, without shame.
The movie, much like the book has us meet present Ani – who seems to have it all, impressive journalist career, rich fiancé, and is on her way to becoming an editor for The New York Times. And yet, she’s plagued by an incident from her past that’s linked to personal trauma as well as collective trauma. Mila Kunis skillfully brings this complex character to life in the present timeline, while Chiara Aurelia portrays teen Ani is a stark contrast to her present self, as teen Ani is curvaceous with unruly hair who desperately wishes to be accepted by her blue blood rich classmates at her posh private High School. Present Ani is impeccable in looks, but when her fiancé Luke steps away from the table at the restaurant, we see her scarf down two slices of pizza with a hunger that the viewer knows that there’s something brewing instead of Ani that wishes to unleash itself. That she isn’t being her authentic self because present Ani thinks the only way she can move on from her past is to deny everything she was as a teen.
This is a very harrowing yet powerful movie, and if you’re a woman it’s one you don’t want to miss because finally there’s a character that is both complex and messy and yet manages to honor her younger self in the end by doing something that her teenage self would’ve approved of. The way in which Mila Kunis delivers the most eloquent fuck you in the final scene will make you think that that fuck you is one that many women can stand behind
DID YOU ENJOY WHAT YOU JUST READ? IF YES, THEN SUBSCRIBE TO THE BLOG, GIVE THE POST A LIKE, OR LEAVE A COMMENT! NEW POSTS ARE UP EVERY TUESDAY & THURSDAY!
Typically, it’s always a challenge to have a movie with only two actors carrying the film for a good portion of it, especially when the setting doesn’t change. From the very beginning, a couple, Kate (Kate Bosworth) and Mikey (Emile Hirsch) are contestants in a strange game in which they agree to spend 50 days living in a white room. If they manage to do that, the couple will win $5 million dollars, if for some reason one of them chooses to leave the room prior to 50 days, the prize money drops to $1 million.
The room has the chilly aesthetic of a chic art gallery, and with no form of entertainment whatsoever, the couple must learn to live with boredom for 50 days. We soon learn that Kate views the money as a means to put her mind at ease after spending a life worrying about her finances, while Mikey comes from a wealthy family and it’s still unclear why the money would mean much to him other than to be supportive of his girlfriend. For most pre-lockdown people, staying in a room for 50 days would’ve seemed like an easy feat, but as lockdown made us all realize, being confined is actually much harder than it looks.
Hirsch is animated as Mikey, as he explains what he would do with the money if he were to win, or how to kill boredom he begins to read the tag on his shirt in different accents. Bosworth’s performance is more contained as her character Kate tries to keep herself together with daily affirmations. It isn’t until the addition of external people that she gets triggered and her balance begins to tilt. The couple’s shut-in world begins to shake the moment Simone (Ashley Greene Khoury) enters the room, which sparks jealousy and tension to rise between the couple. It doesn’t take long for the ugly emotions to surface for it to bring things to a head.
The film begins with a study on boredom and if it’s possible to be driven mad by it, but it quickly devolves into the malice of greed and how far would one go to keep the prize in question. Again, for being a film that focuses mostly on two characters and one location, the script was interesting, although this film is less Squid Games than I had anticipated and ends on a positive note.
DID YOU ENJOY WHAT YOU JUST READ? IF YES, THEN SUBSCRIBE TO THE BLOG, GIVE THE POST A LIKE, OR LEAVE A COMMENT! NEW POSTS ARE UP EVERY TUESDAY & THURSDAY!
By the time this post will be live, Nightmare Alley will have been nominated for Best Picture for 2022. Now, as a horror fan, it always excites me whenever I see a horror film on the Academy Awards ballot, so of course, I’m thrilled to see it there. At the same time, I don’t feel like this film was Del Toro’s best. This film was a remake of the 1947’s Nightmare Alley, in which Tyrone Power played the lead, but also was the one to insist for the film to be made in the first place. Having watched the original film, it’s very difficult to enjoy Bradley Cooper attempting to be the leading noir man when despite his best efforts at being a good actor, simply lacks the charisma of a true leading man (especially when you compare Power’s stage presence with his).
The film is adapted from the bestselling novel of the same name by William Lindsay Gresham. The plot is a fascinating one: a man down on hi luck joins a traveling carnival. The man in question is Stanton Carlisle (Bradley Cooper) and he quickly grows fascinated with wanting to learn the tricks to become a mentalist (mind reader). He believes he can outsmart the average man and in doing so can make money off of their stupidity and hope.
That is until he meets Lilith Ritter (Cate Blanchett) a psychiatrist with wealthy clients. The two team up to try to schill money out of the wealthy, but Stanton makes the mistake of thinking that he’s more powerful and cunning than he actually is.
Of course, Del Toro excels in depicting the perfect noir film scenes and the pacing is excellent, and the cast’s saving graces are Cate Blanchett and Toni Collette. But with a movie that runs over two hours, it’s difficult to root for a leading man that we don’t care anything about (in the 1947 original we do feel sorry for Tyrone Power’s Stanton) in this remake, we can’t help but be happy for Bradley Cooper’s Stanton to get exactly what he deserved.
If you haven’t watched the original you may enjoy this version more than I did, or if at least you don’t expect much from your leading men other than being “easy on the eye,” as Toni Collette’s Zeena tells Stanton in the very beginning, then you may overlook this miscasting. Other than that, I recommend the film because the plot is interesting and has a very bold message: Can we truly outrun our real nature, or will we ultimately befall what we really are? I’d also say to read the book because it’s excellent.
DID YOU ENJOY WHAT YOU JUST READ? IF YES, THEN SUBSCRIBE TO THE BLOG, GIVE THE POST A LIKE, OR LEAVE A COMMENT! NEW POSTS ARE UP EVERY TUESDAY & THURSDAY!
I’ve enjoyed Edgar Wright films ever since he began with Shaun of the Dead. Now, Last Night In Soho doesn’t have time to be witty or funny as it’s drenched in dread and blood.
This film has everything I personally love, London, 60’s music, and a badass chick in the form of Sandy (Anya Taylor-Joy). But the true breakout star of this movie is shy Eloise played by the superb Thomasin McKenzie. Eloise has fashion designer aspirations and when she’s over the moon when she’s accepted to a fashion school in London. Only she finds out real quick that London isn’t as amazing as it seems when she fails to fit in with her college peers and seeks refuge in Soho where she rents a room from Miss Collins.
The moment Eloise enters the room, she begins to have visions of the past. Every night when she goes to sleep she mysteriously enters the world of 1960’s London and sees the night life from the eyes of aspiring singer Sandy. Initially, Eloise is smitten to enter the world she always wanted to inhabit. In her waking life, she tries to emulate Sandy, by her looks, haircolour, and speech. But she soon discovers that all the glitz and glamour isn’t as it seems especially when she witnesses a brutal murder. Soon, she’s being haunted even in her waking life, and the fine line between reality and fiction weave in a terrible fever dream that comes to a brutal head in the final act.
This film will leave you speechless in the final act but also with a smirk.
DID YOU ENJOY WHAT YOU JUST READ? IF YES, THEN SUBSCRIBE TO THE BLOG, GIVE THE POST A LIKE, OR LEAVE A COMMENT! NEW POSTS ARE UP EVERY TUESDAY & THURSDAY!
This film from writer-director Patrick Rideremont is a fever dream of a modern fairytale of storts. Eva (Eugenie Derouand) is a former ballet dancer who is now stuck in a wheelchair after a car accident (caused by her best friend). Said best friend gives her an ancient Advent Calendar for her birthday and this is when the Faustian thrills begin.
From love potions, voodoo, and trippy hallucinations, this horror has it all. The rules of the Advent Calendar are quite simple, eat all of the candy in the calendar or you die, follow all of the calendar’s rules or you will die, and don’t you dare throw the calendar away or you will die.
The calendar seemingly seems to give Eva everything she desires, but receiving these “gifts” means that she must be willing to sacrifice something as well. As the days go on, the gifts she reaps are bigger and the sacrifices begin to get much more personal each time.
Reading some reviews of the film, I know some didn’t like the idea that a disabled character would go above and beyond morality to try to regain the use of her legs. And I get why that would be problematic. I think the script should’ve shown the real reason why Eva was obsessed with regaining the use of her legs so that she could dance again (ballet was her life). Without showing the audience how important ballet was to her, her drive to be “normal” feels like a form of ableism.
Overall, the film has beautiful cinematography and the actual Advent Calendar prop is something that all horror enthusiasts would love to have (maybe without the Faustian curse though).
You can check out the film on Shudder.
DID YOU ENJOY WHAT YOU JUST READ? IF YES, THEN SUBSCRIBE TO THE BLOG, GIVE THE POST A LIKE, OR LEAVE A COMMENT! NEW POSTS ARE UP EVERY TUESDAY & THURSDAY!
Since I’m currently in the works of trying to write a contained horror script I decided to look up which films fell into that category and this came up. Apparently it came out in 2014, and is produced by Twisted Pictures (known for producing horror films) I was slightly confused as to why it was marketed as a thriller (at least from the blurb) especially since the plot would’ve resonated more with horror fans. I’m not the sort of person who reads reviews before jumping into films or books, I kinda prefer going into something totally blind so as not to spoil the experience with expectations or preconceived opinions.
Now, I wasn’t sure what to expect from a movie directed, co-written, and starring Ryan Phillippe (Cruel Intentions, I Know What You Did Last Summer) since his most recent credits include mostly the action genre but like most first time film directors there are two ways anyone’s first film can go they either make a horror (like Romola Garai’s Amulet) or they make a pseudo-autobiographical film (like Asia Argento’s Scarlet Diva). Now Phillippe decided to flip the switch and do both. It’s a horror film whose protagonist pretty much mirrors Phillippe himself. My horror fam will get me when I say that this film is a cross between Hostel and Lake Placid.
The premise is pretty simple, Reagan Pearce is an actor struggling to find the perfect project that will put him back in the game for A-list films, instead he finds himself having to take roles he’s not too crazy about, whilst also feeling the weight of what it means to be over 40 in Hollywood (basically, a death sentence). That’s why he finds himself heading out to Shreveport, Louisiana for a role he’s not too keen on but that his manager tells him he’s gotta do “cause you know why.”
The following morning he is picked up by a different driver than the day before. Two questionable rednecks pass themselves off as production members, and Reagan reluctantly gets in the van. It doesn’t take long for him to realize he’s made a major mistake but tries not to freak out as red flags are waving neon bright alarms. Unfortunately for him, he soon finds himself being held captive under the premise that he slept with the wife of one of the two men who abducted him. Mike (Ian Barford) is a violent man, convinced that Reagan needs to pay for his transgressions, whilst Junior (Stephen Louis Grush) goes along with the plan as a favor to his uncle. The two keep the actor chained to a wall in an isolated shack, the looks of it reminiscent of Saw.
It doesn’t take long for the torture to happen and as an ex-pianist I can’t help but majorly cringe whenever hands are severely crushed/maimed/or broken. If you’ve seen enough abduction films, you can kind of predict what’s going to happen but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, I think this sort of film would’ve found a receptive audience in film fests like Shriekfest or Scream Fest at the time. As someone who has written/directed/starred in my own short film, I can definitely say that it’s a very difficult task so the fact that Phillippe managed to do all of that with 19 filming days, I’m impressed. Ultimately, we never know if Reagan had truly hooked up with Mike’s wife, but he definitely did know her.
The film’s strength is the unpredictability of the two villains, even when we start to see one as the nicer one, you’re thrown another twist and can’t help but cringe expecting the worst to happen. By the way, the nature of this film is high on tension so if you’re expecting to have a moment to relax with some comedic relief, it rarely occurs, but in a way allows us to fully immerse ourselves in Reagan’s perspective and thus feel the same uncertainty, fear, and dread.
If you’re a fan of contained semi-campy horror or just a fan of abduction movies, then I would recommend you to check it out.
And if for some reason Ryan Phillippe ever feels compelled to direct something vastly different (but yet still violently brutal) then he should hit me up cause Terror!Depicts the French Revolution in ways you haven’t seen before (plus it’s chock-full of gallows humor cause that’s the only humor I know).
Watch Catch Hell on Amazon Prime Video
DID YOU ENJOY WHAT YOU JUST READ? IF YES, THEN SUBSCRIBE TO THE BLOG, GIVE THE POST A LIKE, OR LEAVE A COMMENT! NEW POSTS ARE UP EVERY TUESDAY & THURSDAY!
The Inkblotters 