Weekend Watch - Y2K

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is the late 90s, early 2000s nostalgia-fueled teen horror comedy from SNL alum Kyle Mooney and production studio A24, Y2K. The disaster movie about what could have happened if the machine apocalypse really was triggered by the turnover from 1999 to 2000 stars Jaeden Martell, Rachel Zegler, Julian Dennison, Daniel Zolghadri, Lachlan Watson, Fred Durst, Kyle Mooney, Eduardo Franco, Mason Gooding, and The Kid Laroi. The film opened in theaters this weekend to middling reviews from both audiences and critics. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: D+; giving this film any rating higher than this would feel wrong, but it does some things really well, depending on your take on it.

Should you Watch This Film? Obviously not, right? Unless… there’s some moments in this film that are truly some of the funniest moments this year (often unintentionally). It’s not good, but it might be fun enough to warrant a watch.

Why?

                Y2K on paper is a film full of clunky dialogue, odd skips in scenes, a marked lack of internal logic for its premise, and an aggressive amount of homages to the cringeyest parts of late 90s and early 2000s culture. If you’re watching it as a conventional high school horror comedy, you’re going to be frustrated with the seeming randomness of the way that story beats unfold – the story is the loosest skeleton, relying almost entirely on convenient plot points to move from scene to scene and moment to moment – and the horror never really hits beyond some moments of gore and some solid practical effects for a B-movie. However, by the end of the film, I was able to appreciate what the film was doing because it becomes readily apparent that the film and actors are in on the joke. No one in this film, by the time it made it to the big screen at least, seems to be seeking to make something “good”. Rather, the film feels like one big troll and/or parody of the 90s and 2000s nostalgia that has been seeing a resurgence in the last year or so. The first twenty minutes of film will hit like crack for people looking for those old references within a high school comedy, and it’s probably objectively the best part of the film; however, once things start spinning out of control, the film leans into the odder parts of 2000s culture – coding, niche rap, Limp Bizkit – and you start to realize that you can either lean into the jokes and laugh at the fact that people once lived like this or sit back and get mad that the film isn’t behaving at all like a typical high school, horror, or nostalgia film. On some level this is a smart film, but on all other levels, it’s incredibly dumb, but don’t let that stop you from seeing it, as it’s still one of the funniest new films I’ve watched this year. I don’t know that everyone should see this film, and I don’t know that it really was as intentionally constructed as I’m giving it credit for. What I do know is that my wife and I both laughed a lot while agreeing that it's a very dumb movie. Check it out in theaters if you want to, or don’t. It’s up to you.

Weekend Watch - Speak No Evil

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers is the remake of the 2022 Danish horror film of the same name, Speak No Evil. The Blumhouse-produced remake stars James McAvoy and Aisling Franciosi across from Mackenzie Davis and Scoot McNairy as a pair of couples who meet on vacation in Italy and then decide to spend a long weekend together in the country upon their return to the U.K. The film released in theaters this weekend to solid audience reviews so far and looks to be one of the early successes of 2024’s spooky season. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: B; while not necessarily the most adventurous film, it’s still solidly entertaining.

Should you Watch This Film? If you have seen and loved the first film, I have a feeling that this film won’t be for you, but if you’re looking for a relatively tame but thrilling horror film, it’s worth checking out.

Why?

                Speak No Evil (2024) does a lot of taming down of the story and themes from the original, making the final product much more palatable for a broad audience, already reflected in the films’ respective IMDB, Tomatometer, and Popcornmeter scores, all of which favor this year’s high-tension remake over the subtler and darker European original. To its credit, this year’s film offers a highly entertaining, fairly safe, and solidly acted horror film. It features some quality comedy that cuts through the tension at appropriate moments without ever losing how uncomfortable the characters rightfully are. At the same time, the writing loses some of the plot by playing most of the twists and third act fairly safe, and it gets a bit too heavy-handed with communicating its themes, straight up stating its main idea in a third-act monologue from McAvoy’s antagonist, Paddy. It’s nowhere near a perfect film, but it mostly accomplishes what it sets out to do, offering some good tension and scares to elevate the heartrate that should satisfy most audiences, especially if you can separate it from the original in your mind.

                The real highlight of the film is McAvoy as the film’s primary antagonist, whose twisted motivations become more apparent as the couples’ weekend at Paddy and Ciara’s (Franciosi) farmhouse unfolds. He brings a physicality and eeriness to the character that really sells the ever-increasing tension that the film needs to execute its premise well. He starts out as this hot, abrasive British dad, slowly devolving into a sinister, narcissistic not-quite-mastermind as everything unfolds. It’s a commanding performance that’s sure to stick with everyone who goes to see the film, and it definitely elevates the film above what it might otherwise have been with the same plot and writing.

                The film’s exploration of family dynamics, commentary on society’s people-pleasing tendencies, and critique on our unwillingness to ever just say no land relatively well. None of what the film wants to say is particularly earth-shattering, and it is sometimes delivered with a tendency to tell rather than show. However, the themes aren’t really the point of the film, more just window dressing to give it a sense of weight while the tension and its eventual release keep the audience gripped.

                A fun, if a bit sanitized and simple, horror thriller, Speak No Evil is carried by James McAvoy’s startling performance as the villain, bolstered by some strong tension building, culminating in a solid final act. It definitely won’t please fans of the original, but it should be what those looking for a fun, not too involved, horror film in the early phases of spooky season want from their theater-going experience. You can currently find it in theaters from Blumhouse if you need something like that in your world right now.

Weekend Watch - A Quiet Place: Day One

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is the latest film in the A Quiet Place franchise, A Quiet Place: Day One, the prequel directed by Michael Sarnoski (Pig) and cowritten by Sarnoski and A Quiet Place director John Krasinski. The prequel looks at the start of the franchise’s alien invasion in New York City from the perspective of cancer patient Sam (Lupita Nyong’o) as she fights to survive and get herself some pizza. The film also features appearances from Joseph Quinn as a stranded British law student, Alex Wolff as hospice nurse Reuben, and Djimon Hounsou as harried father Henri. The film opened this weekend to mixed but positive audience and critic reviews. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: B; while not as tension filled as the other two films in the franchise, it still finds those moments of terror and humanity that have made the series such a hit.

Should you Watch This Film? If you’re looking for a less intense horror film, this’ll definitely be one you can check out. The characters are strong, and their stories make it worth watching.

Why?

                I don’t know that A Quiet Place: Day One is going to be what everyone was looking for from the prequel film. It doesn’t set out to explain the aliens or their reasons for coming to Earth or even set up some initial fight against them. It simply wants to look at another story within this universe that happens to occur in the first few days of the alien invasion. For me, that’s exactly what I needed from it. I was so worried going in that it was going to try and do too much explaining and worldbuilding and lose any of the pieces that make the first two films so good – the human stories. Instead, this film leans harder into the human element, feeling almost more like a disaster/survival horror than the jumpscare-filled home invasion horror of the first or the postapocalyptic road trip of the second. It’s also helped in this endeavor by the strong performances from Lupita Nyong’o (Us and Little Monsters) and Joseph Quinn (Overlord and Stranger Things) who portray their struggle to survive as something inherently tied to everything that has come before them and their own humanity.

                Technically, the film remains on par with the prior films with a strong sound design, solid visual effects, and another bout of creative cinematography that you really only get from horror films. The oppressive silence isn’t quite as pervasive here as in the past films, but in the moments of true tension, it returns to amp up that heart rate just a bit more at each small sound. The creatures feature a bit more prevalently in this film, and any time you get to see them up close, the visual design holds up as something not quite knowable and immediately horrifying. The camera work continues to do a great job adding to the tension of the scenes, and it all comes together so well to give us another strong, if slightly less terrifying, horror film.

                By focusing on the characters, the film does lose some of that intensity that we’ve become familiar with in the first two films, and I think that’s why we’re seeing some of those less than stellar reviews. The first film really blended those two elements together better than so many horror films, and the second continued in that same vein. This one swings back and forth between the human drama and horror sequences more than actually blending them, but it still works because of how well-executed the human element is. Lupita Nyong’o and Joseph Quinn play well individually and off of each other thanks in large part to each of their abilities to emote, leaning into the gimmick of these films by communicating so well without words. Quinn plays the supporting character so well, portraying empathy and desperation in equal parts so well, and he really gives the story the extra oomph that it needs to really resonate. Obviously, though, Nyong’o is the showstopper here, showing us from the jump how versatile her acting bag is. Here, she plays Sam as this cynical, jaded woman without any real reason to hope, but she manages to find those moments worth celebrating even as the world falls apart around her, and we believe it the whole time thanks to the combination of solid writing and her amazing acting abilities. By the time the credits roll, we’ve seen her progress through a satisfying and believable character arc that reminds us all of why life is worth living – to eat pizza and connect with other people.

                A Quiet Place: Day One might not answer all the burning questions that we have about the start of the alien invasion, and it might lack some of the horror chops of the previous installments, but it still turns in a decently scary survival flick with a truly compelling story about people, which is the core of the Quiet Place films anyway. It’s probably not going to be what everyone wants it to be, but for me, I can now definitely say that I just want to keep watching stories of different individuals in this postapocalyptic world much more than I want to understand how any of it works. This film is currently in theaters, and if you’re looking for a solid thriller, this is the one to go see this weekend.

Weekend Watch - Lisa Frankenstein

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Lisa Frankenstein, the high school romcom from screenwriter Diablo Cody (Juno and Jennifer’s Body) and rookie feature director Zelda Williams. The film stars Kathryn Newton as the titular Lisa, joined by Liza Soberano as her stepsister Taffy, Henry Eikenberry as her crush Michael Trent, Joey Harris as her nemesis Tamara, Bryce Romero as her lab partner Doug, Joe Chrest as her father Dale, Carla Gugino as her stepmom Janet, and Cole Sprouse as “the Creature”. The film follows Lisa as she navigates life at a new high school in her senior year, crushing on the literary magazine editor, convincing her stepmom that she’s not going insane, and keeping a resurrected bachelor from the 1800s hidden in her closet. It opened this weekend in theaters. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: B-; this film should probably be a C were it not for some truly excellent payoffs throughout the film and especially in its last act.

Should you Watch This Film? In theaters? Maybe. At some point? Definitely. It toys with the edges of what can and can’t be done in PG-13 from time to time, but aside from that, there’s definitely something here that needs to be seen by most audiences.

Why?

                Lisa Frankenstein brings to the screen an amalgamation of Napoleon Dynamite, Sixteen Candles, Young Frankenstein, and the color palette of the iconic school supplies that its title references, having been brought to life by a cast that has committed to the absurdity of its bits and a writer/director combo that are willing to take big swings with the aesthetics, humor, and audiences’ expectations. That ends up creating a mess of a film in quite a few spots with plot lines left less than fully resolved, some fairly obvious set pieces designed to give us some exposition, and plenty of character choices that don’t make sense in the real world, but hey, this is romcom horror, and those pieces work excellently. The homage to classic monster movies, the occasionally visceral violence, the will-they-won’t-they love “triangle” that Lisa unwittingly traps herself in, and the commitment to making jokes that are unabashed in their setup and delivery go a long way in turning what is objectively a bit of a mess into something that should become a cult classic like those films it digs up.

                The performers are the key to making this film’s craziness work, and the core group hold it together with some excellent commitments to the bit. Have we already seen Joe Chrest play the clueless 1980s dad for four seasons of Stranger Things? Yes, but he’s at it again here in a slightly more endearing version of that character, giving the film exactly what it needs in that role – a dupe whose cluelessness makes the rest of the plot work. Carla Gugino gets to play the fun role of evil stepmother and evil psych nurse rolled into one, and she plays her part to its most absurd and loathsome end. Liza Soberano takes her role of cheerleader turned final girl and does the most with it, playing both aspects well – preppy but lovable in the best way. Cole Sprouse gets to show off mostly his physical repertoire in this film, communicating through expressions, movements, and grunts for basically the entire runtime, and it’s nice to see how capable he is of still making a murderous zombie man into a viable love interest with just those parts available to him. Kathryn Newton is the make-or-break point of the film’s cast, though; portraying a lead that is equal parts goth, troubled poet, it girl and occasional mad scientist, she has to walk a fine line, for which she is fully up to the task. From singing 80s power ballads off-tune in her living room to flirting with her crush(es?) to struggling with the pressure of the increased scrutiny after various disappearances that may or may not be her fault she brings the audience in and turns her Frankenstein-esque character into a believable and, indeed, lovable romantic comedy lead.

                As I already mentioned, the story side of Cody’s script might not be the film’s strongest aspect, and in fact, it’s probably its weakest. At least one unresolved plot line, plenty of convenient ineptitude from authority figures, and a less-than-fully consistent use of a semi-magical tanning bed make for a story that requires its audience to look past its flaws to fully appreciate it. At the same time, though, Cody’s comedy comes through at just the right level throughout the film. Its combination of camp, feminism, and shock-value fits in perfectly with the film’s genres, and her ability to choreograph the set-up and delivery of the film’s jokes helps make up for the lack of delivery on some of the plot set-ups. It’s laugh-out-loud funny at some points, and there’s one scene in the film’s third act that had the whole audience laughing harder than I’ve heard in a theater since Bottoms last year. It’s nice to have a romantic comedy/horror that doesn’t feel like it has to be self-aware. It’s still referential to those films that came before it, but none of it feels self-effacing like so many romantic comedies have become. It’s genuine and committed to itself, which is really about all that you can ask for a film these days.

                With a committed cast, a solidly produced genre blend, and humor that seems to hit all the right notes, Lisa Frankenstein lets audiences look past a lot of its story flaws and plot holes to be an enjoyable watch just in time for Valentine’s Day. Is it the best rom-com or horror film in recent years? Not really. It does wear its heart on its sleeve, though, and refuses to be anything but itself, which should be enough to get some people out to see it this week.

Weekend Watch - Thanksgiving

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Eli Roth’s new holiday slasher, Thanksgiving, which opened in theaters this weekend. The film, which follows the citizens of Plymouth, MA, who are being terrorized at Thanksgiving by a masked killer one year after a disastrous Black Friday sale left multiple people dead, stars Nell Verlaque, Patrick Dempsey (sexiest man alive 2023), Rick Hoffman, Milo Manheim, Addison Rae, Karen Cliche, Ty Olsson, Jenna Warren, Tomaso Sanelli, Gabriel Davenport, and Joe Delfin as its ensemble of potential killers and victims. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: B+; it’s got plenty of that tongue-in-cheek slasher humor and gory action to please any audience even if its story underwhelms in the final act.

Should you Watch This Film? Yes! This is a great time at the theater that never gets too serious or self-important, giving audiences just about everything they might want in a new classic slasher.

Why?

                Thanksgiving delivers up a fun, anti-Black Friday slasher ride that feels like Eli Roth at his most crowd-pleasing, never getting excessive with its gore while still maintaining the director’s twisted reputation with a collection of creative holiday-themed kills and injuries. It’s not a perfect film by any stretch of the imagination with a third act and mystery that end up fairly underwhelming in their execution due to an aggressively choreographed plot twist that even the most basic viewer can probably see coming from a mile away. There’s plenty of dangling plot details to potentially give us sequels if it does well enough, and I really hope that it does because the film’s themes of corrupt business owners, cross-town rivalries, and Thanksgiving-related shenanigans deserve to be further explored alongside its archetypal cast of characters.

                The best parts of the film are its moments of creative kills and attacks that often come out of nowhere. They had the audience in my theater absolutely losing our minds with creative use of industrial-grade ovens, corn cob holders, pilgrim axes, and the heavy doors of a restaurant’s dumpster. They are brutal in the most hilarious ways possible, living very much in the same space as Tarantino’s stylized gore. Each one leans into the film’s holiday motifs and feels like something you haven’t quite seen before in a slasher, at least not in this context. It’s fun to see this type of innovation in a genre that so often relies solely on tropes and familiarity, especially in recent years, to win audiences over.

                Story-wise, Thanksgiving jumps in with a promising premise – someone is out for revenge on the people responsible for a violent and deadly Black Friday mob one year later at Thanksgiving in Plymouth, Massachusetts, the home of the original Thanksgiving (purportedly). After showcasing the horror of a mob at a Black Friday sale, which also introduces us to the film’s collection of characters, it gets into its present-day setting, a town amping up for a Thanksgiving celebration with cross-town sports rivalries, a parade getting prepped up, and lots of hurt feelings as the town approaches the anniversary of the previous year’s disaster. Every bit of dialogue is loaded with potentially incriminating statements to keep the audience guessing as to who the real killer is and whether there might even be multiple killers operating in tandem. For anyone paying the slightest bit of attention, it’s pretty obvious who the perpetrator(s) is (are?), but there’s enough smoke and mirrors and plenty of fun violence to make up for that lack of mystery.

                Each of the characters are fun and decently fleshed-out, with a well-selected cast of lesser-known actors portraying them (2023’s sexiest man alive Patrick Dempsey notwithstanding). Dempsey delivers a performance that works well in building up the setting as Plymouth’s thick-accented sheriff, worried about the impact of the killings on the town’s annual celebration of Thanksgiving. Nell Verlaque does the most as Thanksgiving’s new final girl, occasionally making some questionable decisions but never losing the audience’s support in a passable performance as a burgeoning scream queen. Her band of friends, comprised of Milo Manheim, Addison Rae, Jenna Warren, Tomaso Sanelli, and Gabriel Davenport, fills out the cast well, giving the audience enough individuality to make us curious about who makes it out and who might be the killer.

                Thanksgiving might not have the most surprising reveals and suffers some in its third act, but its fun characters, innovative violence, and tongue-in-cheek humor more than make it a satisfying time in the theaters and a welcome addition to the slasher genre. It might not be perfect, but there’s plenty of potential to follow it up with Thanksgiving 2 (or Easter or St. Patrick’s Day or July 4th) if Eli Roth wants to give us more, and I certainly hope that he does. It’s currently showing in theaters, and I definitely recommend checking it out this week as a way to celebrate the holiday.

Weekend Watch - Five Nights at Freddy’s

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating and review. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers is Five Nights at Freddy’s, the videogame adaptation from Blumhouse about a security guard at a shutdown children’s pizza restaurant who must contend with the violent tendencies of its haunted animatronics while he keeps watch at night. The film stars Josh Hutcherson as the film’s lead Mike, joined by Piper Rubio as his sister and charge Abby, Elizabeth Lail as local police officer Vanessa, and Matthew Lillard as the career counselor who places Mike at Freddy’s, Steve Raglan. It opened last weekend to some of the worst reviews of the year while also winning the weekend at the box office. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: C-, it’s not as terrible as people say, but a few tweaks would take it from just okay to something truly great.

Review:

                Five Nights at Freddy’s offers a slightly toned down but still atmospheric and jump-scare heavy horror film that just misses the mark on a few too many notes to feel totally true to its source material. Through its soundtrack, puppeteering, and creative twists on the game’s lore, it offers audiences a fairly fresh take on the horror genre, with lots of potential for any future installments. Unfortunately, predictable plot twists, inconsistent performances, and a miniscule level of the blood and gore that you might expect from such a film leave it as a middling offering to wrap up spooky season (or not if you’re trying to watch Thanksgiving in a couple of weeks).

                As far as capturing the feel of the video game from which it is inspired, I think this film does a decent job. It has plenty of jump-scares, Easter eggs, and lore-specific statements to please fans of the game. The soundtrack that goes along with it all really adds to the 1980s atmospheric theming with lots of synth and 16-bit sounds that really immerse the audience in the world – particularly in the film’s opening sequence, which features maybe the film’s best overall vibes. The disappointment comes when the camera cuts away from the instances of violence in order to maintain a PG-13 rating that will give it a larger audience base and box office haul. While the games maintain a palatable T for Teen age rating, they do this by minimizing the on-screen violence and relying heavily on jump-scares, which makes for a satisfying gaming experience. However, horror films that cut away from the violence and utilize primarily jump-scares are inevitably going to suffer in the ratings department, and I think here, the film could actually be a more critical success if it leaned a bit harder into the franchise’s Saw adjacencies and less on its marketability with 8-to-12-year-olds.

                Game creator and co-writer of the film Scott Cawthon has taken the lore of his hit franchise and twisted bits and pieces of it to craft what should be an original enough story for fans who came in knowing the depths of Freddy’s lore. It plays around with characters and storylines in a way that still gives us a satisfying story even if its beats are fairly predictable and familiar for the average moviegoer. The real breakdown is not so much in the changes from the source material but in the execution of the new story, which is rife with plot holes and less-than-surprising twists. Combine that with inconsistent performances from both Hutcherson and Lail, and you’re left with a somewhat disappointing story that still entertains but doesn’t really wow.

                Hutcherson is at his best in the film when he gets to just talk and be present, expressing more subtle trauma and emotionality quite well. It’s the moments when he has to explode and emote more intensely that his performance breaks down a bit and reverts too much to his younger self to be believable. Likewise, Lail’s performance as Vanessa feels too insincere in the film’s moments of emotional connection and simple explanations, but when the going gets tough, she exhibits fear and terror excellently in her expressions, giving the audience a glimpse at some potential horror greatness if she can nail those other beats. Lillard’s cameo moments work well enough, but it’s fairly obvious what part he has to play, and certain moments feel a bit more phoned in than I’d typically like – he’s not late-90’s/early-2000s Matthew Lillard anymore (at least not here). Piper Rubio might give the film’s best performance, but it’s not an overly complex one, as she gives the audience a glimpse into the childlike innocence that has been so often victimized by the film’s antagonistic forces. She is kind and good and a little bit airy, but it works well enough.

                Five Nights at Freddy’s struggles to find solid footing with an atmosphere and adaptation that almost work perfectly but break down like the animatronics in the presence of tasers when you take into account the film’s conventional plot and inconsistent performances that leave something to be desired. It’s by no means the worst film of the year, but it could definitely have been a much better film with just a few tweaks and really gone down as a great video game adaptation. As it stands, it’s a passable horror film on the level of most others, not really elevated or innovative but still thrilling in its creation of a suspenseful atmosphere and use of jump-scares.

Weekend Watch - A Haunting in Venice

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating and review. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Kenneth Branagh’s latest Hercule Poirot film – A Haunting in Venice. This one finds Branagh again in the role of the Belgian sleuth, joined again by a star-studded cast of victims and suspects, including Michelle Yeoh, Jamie Dornan, Tina Fey, Riccardo Scamarcio, and Kelly Reilly. The film takes on a slightly different tone than Branagh’s other two Poirot films, leaning harder into the horror elements of its subject matter, loosely adapting Agatha Christie’s Hallowe’en Party. It opened this weekend in theaters. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: C+, the horror elements are a welcome addition to Branagh’s fairly nondescript detective film series, but minimal character development and a fairly predictable mystery keep the film in a middling tier of films.

Review:

                A Haunting in Venice improves upon the Poirot formula with some new elements of supernatural horror and the use of far less CGI in its cinematography and set design to give us a decently passable entry in the canon of mystery films – superior in almost every way to its predecessor Death on the Nile and arguably better than Branagh’s Murder on the Orient Express as well. The new ensemble of characters, while not overly fleshed out or dynamic, provide some solid performances with more to do than the cast of Branagh’s previous two entries in this current Poirot series, which then (surprisingly) gives Branagh less to do, again improving upon the flaws of the first two films, saving us from an excess of Branagh’s wild attempt at a Belgian accent. The story and mystery are still fairly simple and easy to follow and unravel, leaving this film stranded somewhere in the middle in terms of its watchability.

                Venice finds our detective living in retirement in the titular city, enjoying the sights and eating pastries on his balcony while a bodyguard – Riccardo Scamarcio’s Vitale Portfoglio – keeps supplicants at bay. It is only the arrival of his friend, mystery author Ariadne Oliver (Tina Fey), with an offer of debunking a medium at a séance followed by a murder at said séance that can bring Poirot back into the game. The mystery unfolds as the other Poirot films have, with a group of mostly familiar celebrity faces trapped in a single location while the detective endeavors to discover which of them committed the crime. The actual mystery is two-pronged, with the purported murderer most likely also responsible for a past murder in the same location, but it’s not the mystery that holds the audience’s attention for the majority of the film, as the perpetrator(s) quickly become apparent to most viewers. The true hook for the story (and the film) comes in the form of the supernatural elements in the second act. While the séance is quickly debunked, other seemingly supernatural occurrences continue throughout the film’s run, plaguing Poirot specifically with haunting children’s songs, phantom appearances in mirrors, and frightening images abounding in the film’s second forty minutes or so. While it’s not on the level of a James Wan film, for a PG-13 mystery horror, the suspense, atmosphere, and jump scares do a solid job of achieving that element of horror lite needed to season the mystery well.

                One thing that Branagh has done well with his Poirot films is casting his ensembles of characters, and Venice continues in that tradition. While the characters are little more than archetypes, each of the actors portrays their archetype well. Branagh’s Poirot himself has arguably less to do in this film than in either of the other two entries, and that allows the actor to lean into the more endearing parts of the character without coming across as overtly self-serving, as he has in the past. Fey brings some levity and intensity to her role as the washed-up mystery novelist looking to revitalize her career with a new Poirot-inspired story. Yeoh seems like she gets to have the most fun as the nebulous medium Mrs. Reynolds, playing the woman with a connection to the other side with just the right blend of airiness and insanity. Dornan’s veteran physician suffering from PTSD offers a reminder of the actor’s versatility and ability to exhibit some level of depth and emotionality when given the opportunity. Finally, Kelly Reilly brings her A-game to the eternally mournful, not fully adjusted diva and host Rowena Drake, playing tragically bereaved mother and potential femme fatale with aplomb, rounding out the leading cast in satisfactory fashion.

                A Haunting in Venice improves upon Kenneth Branagh’s Poirot formula in almost every facet with well-cast characters, more believable visuals, and elements of horror that make the film more interesting, but at the end of the day, the predictable mystery, lack of character development, and familiar tropes leave it as a basic mystery, just fine, but not groundbreaking. It’s fun to see Branagh getting better at making his Poirot mysteries, so if he does adapt another, maybe it’ll be the one that finally hits the nail right on the head.

Weekend Watch - Haunted Mansion

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating and review. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Haunted Mansion, the latest of Disney’s films based on rides from their parks. This film is in no way related to the Eddie Murphy film from the early 2000s except in its inspiration coming from the same ride. The current film stars an ensemble cast of LaKeith Stanfield, Rosario Dawson, Owen Wilson, Tiffany Haddish, Danny DeVito, Jamie Lee Curtis, Chase Dillon, and Jared Leto. It focuses on Dawson’s Gabbie and her son Travis (Dillon) who have bought a new home outside of New Orleans with the goal of turning it into a bed and breakfast and have discovered that it is haunted, leading them to turn to a series of experts – a physicist, medium, historian, and priest played by Stanfield, Haddish, DeVito, and Wilson respectively – to rid themselves of their ghost problem. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: B-; this film isn’t “good” like last week’s slate of excellence, but it knows its lane and delivers a solid film for its genres and target audience.

Review:

                Haunted Mansion is every bit the Disney ride adaptation that we’ve come to expect, never quite hitting the highs of the first Pirates film, but delivering a quality blend of goofy effects, Easter eggs for the devoted fans, and light comedy in the midst of serious stakes. For me, I’d say this film outperforms the more recent ride adaptations – Jungle Cruise, Tomorrowland, The Country Bears, and The Haunted Mansion – thanks to better comedy, better acting, and a simpler story.

                The humor can be hit and miss, but for my wife and me, it was certainly more hit than miss – even if the rest of the audience didn’t quite seem as tickled by a lot of it. This can’t come as much of a surprise, considering writer Katie Dippold’s track record – writing such hits as Parks and Rec’s “Indianapolis” and “The Set Up” but also flops like Ghostbusters (2016) and Snatched. The jokes and characters all feel very trope-y in an endearing way that keeps the film familiar even if it’s not overly original. With a story that does a good job of establishing characters and connections, including a fun heist-esque montage of recruiting the various players, the film is at its best in the first two acts with a third act that rushes a bit to get the characters to a conclusion that only feels satisfying for one of its characters but leaves you happy enough with the outcome.

                The actors help to make their archetypes work well, introducing unique flairs to their characters to help them stand out against the familiarity. Dawson plays maybe the most familiar character in Gabbie, the unsuspecting homeowner and mother who gets caught up in a haunting. She plays her with the right amount of heart and backbone to hold the unlikely team together. Dillon’s Travis plays an interesting addition/sidekick to Gabbie’s character, struggling with his recent disconnection from his father (Gabbie’s husband). Dillon brings a lot of fun to the son character while still giving a deep enough performance to make his character arc interesting. Stanfield’s Ben Matthias has the most depth of the film’s players, struggling with an inner grief that he portrays in a surprisingly heartfelt and moving way for such an otherwise simple and comedic film. His acting far outweighs the rest of the cast for most of the film, but he manages to tone it down enough in the funny moments to get some laughs for himself as well. Wilson, Haddish, and DeVito deliver the most laughs of the film as the supporting cast, each with their own unique takes on the familiar character tropes. Wilson’s priest with a shady background, Father Kent, brings that familiar Owen Wilson squirrely charm to the typical unorthodox priest character. Haddish’s medium, Harriet, gets the most laugh-out-loud moments and lines in the film, coming across as a fraud with just a hint of authenticity, keeping the energy very light as we’ve come to expect from the skilled comedienne. DeVito’s historian, Bruce Davis, mostly exists to give some exposition, but he also gets some moments to be the funny, irreverent old man that DeVito so often embodies these days.

                With an ensemble cast that brings a solid blend of heart and humor to the familiar (and maybe a bit too rushed) story, plenty of nods to the ride that inspired it, and just enough mild and goofy horror moments, Haunted Mansion is a passable and fun time at the movies that won’t necessarily break any new ground in its genres but should please the crowd. It far outshines some of the more recent live action Disney outings, but it also won’t be making anyone’s top-10 family or horror or comedy films any time soon. Go in hoping for a lighthearted good time that won’t make you think too hard, and you won’t be disappointed.

Weekend Watch - Renfield

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is the Nic Cage, Awkwafina, and Nicholas Hoult starring action/comedy/horror film, Renfield, which opened in theaters nationwide this weekend. The film also features a supporting cast of Ben Schwartz, Shohreh Aghdashloo, Brandon Scott Jones, Camille Chen, and Adrian Martinez as it tells a modern story of Dracula and his titular familiar Renfield. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: C; this film delivers on all the levels that a bad action comedy should; it just struggles in most other areas.

Should you Watch This Film? Maybe: Nic Cage fans will be happy with his performance, and people who enjoy an excessively gory action/comedy will have that itch scratched. I don’t know that it’s a must-see in theaters for anyone though.

Why?

                Renfield’s highs are honestly surprisingly high, while its lows are almost abysmally low. It’s got a few performances that have really sold out to their roles, delivering wildly memorable performances, and some really fun and creative violent action sequences that almost look like something out of Deadpool or (for those who will get the reference) Happy Tree Friends with their levels of insanity and cartoonish gore. On the flip side, the writing – especially the “inspirational” moments – comes across as aggressively cringey in most scenes, and the comedy only hits about half the time if you haven’t been drinking excessively before you come in (speaking for the group of guys in front of me at the theater who laughed late and loud at just about every joke, no matter how small). So really, your enjoyment of Renfield depends entirely on what you walk into the movie looking for.

                Performance-wise, there’s a few worth noting in this film who took some mediocre writing and turned it into solid acting. Nicholas Hoult as the titular anti-hero (at least in this iteration) does what the script requires and delivers yet another solid man-who-has-never-fully-expressed-his-emotions-before-and-is-now-on-a-journey-of-self-discovery performance to add to his repertoire (see Warm Bodies, X-Men: First Class, and Mad Max: Fury Road for more examples). Awkwafina’s Officer Rebecca Quincy is given a lot of expository dialogue, hampering her character somewhat, but she fully delivers on every single comedic line she’s given, quickly becoming a crowd favorite as the film progresses. Ben Schwartz is once again playing a slightly eviler Jean-Ralphio Saperstein, and since he’s lived in this lane for so long, it makes sense to see him play the skeevy son of a crime boss in his side villain role as Ted Lobo. Brandon Scott Jones gets to have maybe the most fun in the film, playing the sponsor of the codependent relationship support group that Renfield attends, Mark, as the comedic MVP of the film, playing just the cheesiest version of a group sponsor you could possibly imagine – so out of place but so great in the midst of this otherwise dark comedy. Really though, the best performance in this film is given by Nicolas Cage as Dracula. He benefits from some great makeup work, but even without it, his acting would speak for itself as he brings just the right blend of menace, cruelty, and aloofness to the world’s most famous vampire. It’s his performance that truly elevates the film from generic to memorable, making it worth watching in my book.

                All of those performances shone in the film despite its regrettably by-the-numbers plot and often cheesy dialogue. Sometimes the cheese worked with the film, edging it closer to the campy vibe that it goes for – especially with its opening homage to the classic 1930s Dracula, which starts you down a road that never really reaches that desired destination. Unfortunately, most of the cheese feels more forced than organic and serves to take you out of the experience rather than getting you to laugh along with it. Bringing the writing down another notch is its simple and predictable plot that feels like it could have been so much better with just a few tweaks here or there. For the most part, the plot feels like a device to move the audience from one fun action set piece to another, but those moments in between feel so familiar and generic that the film loses a lot of its flair in those moments. Hints at werewolves that never actually come to fruition, vague explanations of Rebecca’s dad being a hero cop that never receive any fleshing out, and middling emotional beats that don’t do anything to actually develop the characters are all points that could have been improved with a few extra rewrites and elevated this film from mostly generic to a true standout.

                Renfield delivers the memorable Dracula performance that you want from Nic Cage, some decently comedic moments, and really fun action sequences in the midst of an otherwise generic story and at-times cringe-worthy script, making it a bad action film at best. If that’s all you’re looking for, I can basically guarantee that you’ll have a good time. If you wanted an iconic horror-comedy with just the right blend of camp and gore, this’ll probably leave you a little bit disappointed. At the end of the day, it’s all about what you want out of the experience and what you go in expecting.

Weekend Watch - Scream VI

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Scream VI, the latest film in the wildly successful meta slasher franchise. This film takes the franchise to the Big Apple, following Sam (Melissa Barrera), Tara (Jenna Ortega), Mindy (Jasmin Savoy Brown), and Chad (Mason Gooding) from last year’s soft reboot, Scream, as they go to college in NYC and are again pursued by the Ghostface Killer. The film again sees the return of Courteney Cox as reporter Gale Weathers and Hayden Panettiere as Scream 4 survivor Kirby Reed, now an FBI agent. Josh Segarra, Jack Champion, Liana Liberato, Devyn Nekoda, and Dermot Mulroney join the cast as newcomers to help round out the roster of potential killers. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: B+/A-; it all depends on your willingness to buy into the nature of the Scream franchise and on how much you enjoyed last year’s reboot – there’s good gore and fun twists either way though.

Should you Watch This Film? If there’s nothing you enjoy about slashers, then Scream VI probably isn’t for you; otherwise, it’s a great time at the theater and entirely worth your time.

Why?

                Scream VI continues in the footsteps of last year’s reboot, focusing on the new characters while sticking with the meta humor and intense slasher violence that have made the films so popular, and it works even better here as the new characters start to come into their own, even if the absence of Neve Campbell’s Sydney does put a bit of a damper on things. The violence is bigger and more intense than in past installments, amping up the gore to new levels in places, making the requisite fake-out deaths even less believable than usual. The performances in the reveal moments are over-the-top in ways that would make William Shatner proud, but even that feels true to the nature of the franchise – making light of itself and other horror films with a solid blend of parody and homage.

                Scream VI’s story feels a bit more contained (even set in the nation’s most populous city) than 5 or 3, focusing most of its action in three locations, allowing the characters to play off of each other and establish themselves as the focus beyond simple connections to the past films. Obviously, much of Melissa Barrera’s Sam’s development focuses on her connection to Billy Loomis, but since it’s all out in the open now, she manages to imbue her character with a deeper sense of self, no longer shrouded in mystery. Jenna Ortega’s Tara continues her streak of rebellious youth characters, but here, she comes into her own as a proverbial “scream queen”, putting herself less in the shoes of the younger sister character and more on the level of a true “final girl” with a performance totally unlike her characters in either Wednesday or X. Even siblings Mindy and Chad manage to establish themselves as something a bit more than one-note, both through romantic ties. Mindy’s knowledge of horror tropes remains endearing, but her genuinely emotional connection to the new character of Anika gives her a bit more depth. Similarly, Chad is no longer just the jock nephew of Randy Meeks, he is now an emotionally invested potential love interest for Tara. Altogether, this feels like a more establishing film than 5 and promises an interesting future for the franchise.

                On some level, the Scream films do seem to have become a bit predictable, and Scream VI is no different. It offers a phenomenal opening scene, playing with the tropes of the past films in new and interesting ways before morphing into a fairly telegraphed whodunnit. This predictability might also stem from my marathon of the rest of the films that I held with my wife last week, putting all the twists and connections fresh in our minds, but suffice it to say that we were only mildly surprised at the inevitable third act reveal. Knowing what was up didn’t really do much to detract from our enjoyment because they did a good job of making us question what we thought we knew thanks to fake-out deaths and red herrings, including a great tease for a surprise return.

                Ultimately, Scream VI is a solid outing for the new “core four” of the franchise, establishing them while providing an entertaining, if mildly flawed, “sequel to the requel” that lands somewhere on the level of 4 and 5 in terms of greatness, better than 3 but not as good as the first two classic films. It’s a great time at the movies with a blend of jump-scares and gore that is sure to please most slasher fans without trying to do too much.

Weekend Watch - The last of Us Episode 1

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week, we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers is the first episode of HBO’s new television series, The Last of Us, based on the critically acclaimed survival horror games from Naughty Dog and Sony. The show stars Pedro Pascal, Bella Ramsey, Gabriel Luna, Merle Dandridge, and Anna Torv and opened its first episode to widespread acclaim from fans of the games and fans of television in general, briefly earning the highest IMDB rating for a television show ever. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: A-; this show is clearly well-made and has made fans happy. We’ll see how it continues to handle the hype.

Should you Watch This Show? Probably. If you loved the games, my understanding is that this is must-watch television and a phenomenal adaptation. If you know nothing about the games but like post-apocalyptic stuff, this looks to be one of the better offerings out there too.

Why?

                The Last of Us’s first episode, titled “When You’re Lost in the Darkness,” comes out swinging, feeling equally like a high-quality television show and a solid video game adaptation at the same time. If you’re like me and have only heard about the games but never played (because you’re an Xbox gamer only or something), the show does a good job of establishing characters, relationships, and the world in the first episode, doing enough to keep us less knowledgeable viewers hooked while paying enough service to the initiated to not alienate them. Their combination of worldbuilding and character establishment has made this one of the better first episodes that I’ve watched in a while, even if it is nearly an hour and a half in runtime (cable used to do double features for their premieres right?).

                Like he does in so many of his features, Pedro Pascal helps sell the product. His performance as Joel just in the first episode has me hooked and interested in his character development. He plays the hardened cynic who secretly cares about people really hard so well at this point that you’d almost forget his first major HBO role as Oberyn Martell. In The Last of Us, he dons a relatively believable southeast Texas accent and shows us a range in this first episode that goes from stretched but loving father to mournful and hardened veteran to begrudging caretaker who finally has had enough and decides to do something about it. Honestly, if he just turns this first episode in as a sizzle reel to casting agencies from here on, he’ll probably be in a job for the next twenty years.

                Luckily for Pascal, The Last of Us is no Wonder Woman 1984, and he doesn’t have to carry the show on his back. As apocalyptic shows go, the production value is high, and the storytelling seems to be taking it in a good direction. Director Craig Mazin and his team do a phenomenal job in this first episode of capturing the world and, strange as it may seem, the gameplay of The Last of Us in the medium of television. From an early scene of a truck suddenly forcing Joel and his daughter to take the longer, more dangerous route out of town to Joel’s to-do list of sidequests in Boston to what I assume is cutscene dialogue options when Joel and Tess are offered the job of transporting Ellie, this first episode showcases the right ways to turn a video game into a less interactive and more linear form of visual media.

                The Last of Us episode one introduces the show’s audience to its world and characters in brilliant fashion, capturing the spirit of the video game in the form of a television show that is sure to make most fans, new and old, happy. One small knock is the show’s current similarity to many other apocalyptic shows, which should be assuaged by the end of this first season if my friends who played the games are to be believed. Should it achieve that uniqueness and distance itself from the pack, I think we can optimistically say that we have been blessed with yet another hit from HBO. The show’s next episode airs tomorrow night, and all episodes are available from the time of release on HBO Max.

Weekend Watch - M3GAN

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Blumhouse’s latest horror cult classic in the making, M3GAN. The film released last weekend to surprisingly great reviews (a 72 Metacritic score and 95% Certified Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes) considering its genre, marketing, and the month of January. The film about an A.I. doll that gains increasing levels of sentience, leading to drastic actions in pursuit of its prime directive of protecting the child Cady, stars Allison Williams, Violet McGraw, Ronny Chieng, and Amie Donald and is now showing in theaters. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: B; it’s definitely not “good” but by embracing its ridiculousness it triumphs, nonetheless.

Should you Watch This Film? Absolutely! It’s a great time, a welcome escape for a quick hour and forty-two minutes with enough heart and story to keep everyone entertained; though you can probably wait for this to hit streaming if you’d rather.

Why?

                Move over, Child’s Play, we’ve got a new scary doll movie that might just be about to make some franchise waves. M3GAN lets you know from the jump exactly what kind of experience this is about to be – irreverent, on-the-nose, and surprisingly tame in terms of its violence. This film has no desire to be in the same club as Get Out or Hereditary or even writer James Wan’s The Conjuring and does a phenomenal job carving out its own niche among the more under-the-radar horror comedies like Happy Death Day or The Cabin in the Woods. In this case, M3GAN’s niche happens to be that of toy horror and its modern evolution out of haunted/possessed dolls into threatening A.I. The film delivers all that you could want from a PG-13 version of this film, with a solid combination of build-up and jump scares, a touching story about family and coming to terms with loss, and so many payoffs you’d swear the writers studied under Chekhov himself.

                As surprising as M3GAN’s success has been, I should also note here that the film is by no means perfect. For January, it might be the closest we’re ever going to get to a perfect wide release, but M3GAN still has its issues. For starters, its PG-13 rating keeps the elements that could have made it a great slasher at a minimum. With no major gore or physical horror to speak of, the film feels a bit muzzled in the horror department. When she finally goes on her rampage, M3GAN only actually kills two characters, neither of which felt overly impactful to the lives of the protagonists. The film’s total body count, including animals and people not killed by the robot, comes to a grand total of seven – not the most violent, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be.

                M3GAN makes up for some of its lack of horror with plenty of (I think intentional) comedy. My theater was laughing out loud noticeably in at least four distinct moments in the film that I can remember, and I found myself and/or my wife chuckling to ourselves in at least ten or twelve others. Ultimately, the film’s embrace of its comedic nature is what has endeared it to audiences and made it one of the most commercially successful January releases in quite some time. A doll singing Sia after it makes a kill, doing a dance as a threat to a potential victim, and running through the woods after a kid on all fours are only a few of the moments that stand out as prime examples (all of which featured in the trailer, so this avoids spoilers) of the filmmakers going full-send on their film’s wild premise. Any film that is so unapologetically itself as M3GAN is deserves recognition and appreciation, and I’m glad to offer it here.

                M3GAN’s ability to embrace its blend of horror, childishness, and fresh takes helps it overcome quite a bit of its shortcomings in the horror department, launching the film on what I anticipate will be a franchise-starting path. It’s currently showing in theaters if you can’t wait to go see it. Otherwise, it’ll probably hit streaming around March, and I definitely recommend giving it a watch.

Weekend Watch - Werewolf by Night

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s subject, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Marvel’s first “Special Presentation” Werewolf by Night. The hour-long special features performances from Gael Garcia Bernal, Laura Donnelly, Harriet Sansom Harris, and Kirk R. Thatcher in what amounts to an MCU Halloween Special that draws heavily on 1930s and ‘40s monster movie influences. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: B+, heavy on style and content, but slightly lower on substance, this is one of Marvel’s most successfully unique offerings in a while

Should you Watch This Television Special? If you already have a Disney+ subscription, then yes. It’s imperfect but thoroughly entertaining for a quick spooky season evening watch.

Why?

                Werewolf by Night relies heavily on its stylistic flair to entertain with a fairly basic story and characters that may or may not interest you, depending on your sensibilities. The use of black and white film, a plethora of practical effects, limited CGI, intensely violent sequences, and simple sets allows the special to be a thoroughly original homage to the monster flicks of the 1930s and ‘40s that happens to also be set within the Marvel Cinematic Universe (implicitly). The cinematography, fight choreography, and production design for this special are remarkably well-executed, immersing the audience well in the world and mood that the filmmakers wanted to create – particularly in the moment when the werewolf is finally revealed. Michael Giacchino’s direction and musical score come through beautifully, blending a few superhero tropes (generic armed guards, a crystal that’ll solve most of the problems, and a will-they/won’t-they relationship between the two leads) with a predominantly original concept, introducing Marvel fans to a part of the universe that had only been hinted at up to this point. With an entirely new cast of characters, most of which are throwaways, Werewolf by Night still manages to achieve buy-in thanks to its production value – something shows like Moon Knight and Ms. Marvel have struggled with to some extent. The characters that make it out of the special are certainly worth exploring further, and the performances across the board, while basic, were solid. Gael García Bernal shines as Jack Russell, bringing his own take to the character, hinting at his tortured soul while also delivering some of Marvel’s textbook wittiness. Laura Donnelly’s Elsa Bloodborne works well in the combination role of femme fatale and damsel in distress, succeeding at being both action star and potential love interest, it’ll be fun to see whether her character is revisited in the future or not. Finally, Harriet Sansom Harris fully commits to the role of Verussa Bloodborne, the host of the evening and seemingly sinister cult leader as well. I say that their performances are solid but basic because these actors are not given much to work with in terms of story, which is the special’s biggest weakness. Because they were shooting for that hour-long runtime, the story beats come quite quickly, and a lot of character development has to be told rather than shown to keep the action moving along. The story is not a total failure, however, because it does give the audience enough to care about the characters and showcases their roles in the universe well enough that by the end of its time, you do want to see more of them. Overall, Werewolf by Night is a successful introduction to this new style of production from Marvel thanks to its good casting choices and unique production design that pays homage to classic monster flicks. I’m excited to see where they continue to take these particular characters and to see what they do in the future with this particular mode of production. Check it out, now streaming on Disney+.

Weekend Watch - Barbarian

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch, where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a review and recommendation. This week’s topic is the surprise hit horror film that dropped last weekend, Barbarian, starring Georgina Campbell, Bill Skarsgård, and Justin Long. The film is about two people who have unintentionally double-booked an Airbnb and then discover some surprising secrets in the house’s basement. Since its release, it has taken critics and audiences by storm, surprising most viewers with a remarkably original story and take on the genre. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: B+; the film’s originality and willingness to bend the mold doesn’t mean that it has fully broken out of some of the more predictable tropes of horror films.

Should you Watch This Film? If you are looking for a new horror film as spooky season approaches, this is one of the better ones out right now for sure.

Why?

                Like most fans and critics have already said, Barbarian succeeds at holding its audience’s attention with some of the most surprising twists and turns in recent horror history, creating a refreshingly original experience in the process. What starts out as a fairly straightforward stranger danger horror flick soon morphs into something much more interesting than that initial premise. The film’s blend of suburban horror and social satire comes through in a way that never feels derivative of anything else. The biggest issue most people will have watching this film will be with some of the wild choices made by the film’s protagonists, which is true of most horror films, but which also works to set up some of the better parts of the film, including its quick and stressful climax. For horror acting, the leads – Georgina Campbell, Bill Skarsgård, and Justin Long – overdeliver in their performances, doing work that is rarely surpassed within the genre, at least in films with comparable budgets. Campbell’s idealistic Tess makes a solid “final girl” that the audience can easily root for even through her many questionable decisions. Skarsgård’s enigmatic Keith works well in the role marked out for him, walking the line between dangerous villain or lovable sidekick as the audience gets to know him (his past role as Pennywise in the It films probably lent a lot to his character’s ambiguity as well, solid casting choice). Long’s problematic and troubled AJ serves as a great foil for Tess and solid comedic relief when needed as well. Honestly, each of them delivers perfectly on what the script asks of them, and it’s a very impressive outing from the trio. The fun originality of Barbarian’s disjointed story pairs with some solid acting from its leads to create one of the biggest surprise hits of the year. Check it out in theaters if you get the opportunity.

Weekend Watch - The Sandman

                Welcome back to the Weekend Watch, where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give you a review and recommendation for watching it. This week, the subject is Netflix’s latest horror series: The Sandman, based on the graphic novel by Neil Gaiman. It features Tom Sturridge as the titular “Sandman” or “Morpheus” or “Dream” and also Boyd Holbrook, Patton Oswalt’s voice, Vivienne Acheampong, Vanesu Samunyai, David Thewlis, and many others. It follows the story of the King of Dreams after he escapes one hundred years of imprisonment in the human world and seeks to set his realm and the things associated with it back to relative normalcy. Let’s get into it.

Letter Grade: B+, there’s a lot of potential here, but it still needs some work to be great

Should you Watch This Show? If you are at all a fan of the graphic novel, yes! If you are looking for a dark fantasy show with really good worldbuilding, then also yes. I don’t think this show is as universally watchable as some of Netflix’s other releases (read Stranger Things) though.

Why?

                Let’s start with some of what makes the show good. From what I can tell, fans of the graphic novel are highly pleased with most of what the show has done with the source material, which is always a good sign for adaptations (we’ll see how Amazon fares next month with their Rings of Power series). The aesthetic of the art comes through well in the visuals, which are mostly phenomenal to behold – some of the more intricate CGI leaves a little to be desired, but for a television show, the effects are pretty solid. The world of the novel also comes through well in the worldbuilding of the show. The many realms and mythical characters come into the story naturally and with adequate explanation, leaving very little confusion as to the role of each new character. The worldbuilding also leaves you wanting more by the end of the season – at least, it did for me, the sucker for good worldbuilding. Unfortunately, because of all of the characters and story arcs that are brought into the ten-episode season, the story sometimes gets left by the wayside and then caught up with later, rather quickly. The two main stories that feature in this season are deeply interesting in their own right, but because of the exposition that also has to occur, the stories both resolve rather quickly and conveniently with little payoff of things set up earlier in the show. At the same time, it feels like this show wants to set up for an adaptation of the entirety of The Sandman, the graphic novel, as many characters have now been introduced who have larger roles to play later on in the greater story, so that’s promising. (That does mean that we need even more watchers when season 2 drops in the future so that Netflix doesn't cancel it as they so often do. In addition to the solid worldbuilding and oddly paced storytelling, the shows acting is at times great and, at others, only so-so. Vanesu Samunyai, whose first credit is this show, puts forth a valiant effort as Rose Walker, the Dream Vortex and focus of the second half of this season, playing to the levels of the actors in her scene. When across from Tom Sturridge, Boyd Holbrook, and John Cameron Mitchell, she brings a very solid A-game, showcasing the emotional and emotive range of a far more experienced actress, holding her own and even upstaging these more seasoned actors. At the same time, in scenes with Razane Jammal’s Lyta or Eddie Karanja’s Jed, the show reverts to acting more on the level with a CW superhero show (still entertaining in a popcorn-y way, but definitely with more cheese). In addition to the performances of Sturridge, Holbrook, and Mitchell, the true highlights of the show come from David Thewlis as the villain of the first arc – the very creepily unhinged John Dee, whom he portrays with just the right amount of menace – and Kirby Howell-Baptiste and Vivienne Acheampong as the two positive mythical influences in Dream’s life – Death and Lucienne the librarian respectively. Death’s one episode in the middle of the season serves as a high point in both the acting and worldbuilding of the show, showcasing its potential, highlighted in Howell-Baptiste’s subtly emotional portrayal of the avatar of Death, who is apparently Dream’s favorite sibling and the one with the most influence over him. In similar fashion, Acheampong plays Lucienne, the librarian of the realm of Dream, and the closest thing Dream has to an advisor or a friend in his own realm. Her acting is consistent throughout the show, delivering a lot of exposition without ever feeling unnecessary and while having a legitimately involved character arc at the same time, developing alongside Dream. All told, the first season of The Sandman is a mixed bag of great worldbuilding, inconsistent storytelling, and acting that is all over the board. The show’s potential to get better makes it worth watching, along with its skillful adaptation of the original source material.

Weekend Watch - Nope

                 Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week, we review and recommend a new piece of film or television media as voted on by the followers on the blog’s Instagram account. This week, the winner of the poll was Jordan Peele’s newest film, Nope, a sci-fi/horror film featuring Daniel Kaluuya, Keke Palmer, Brandon Perea, Steven Yeun, and Keith David. The film is Peele’s third, following the widely successful films Us and Get Out. Without further ado, let’s take a closer look.

Letter Grade: B+; this film is by no means perfect, but most of it is high quality and really fun and original

Should you Watch This Film? I think so; it is a film worth checking out for its combination of original and homage filmmaking.

Why?

                Nope is a genre-blending film whose parts are probably better than the whole. It utilizes elements of sci-fi and alien horror films, psychological thrillers, classic westerns, and family comedies into its own unique package. Writer/director/producer Jordan Peele’s vision shines through most brilliantly in the moments when the film leans all the way into its genres and uses them to make commentary on the state of modern entertainment and “spectacle”. Whether it is exploring aliens and flying saucers, the phenomenon of society’s newfound UFO awareness, the issues with child stars, the dangers and potential of trained animals in film and television, or even a cinematographer looking for the perfect shot, Nope’s highs showcase some brilliant commentary, gorgeous visuals, and a refreshingly unique story. Of Peele’s films, this one is by far the most connected to the world of filmmaking, allowing the director to throw in bits and references to black cinema, and specifically westerns, rewarding some of his more faithful fans in the process. At the same time, Nope’s highlights are also what causes its message to break down by the end. A film critiquing the audiences desire for spectacle while presenting spectacle inevitably feels a bit too on-the-nose or not quite self-aware enough to accomplish its goal, and in watching the film, it feels as if Peele recognized that danger and, therefore, chose to conclude his film with a different note and story emphasis. Unfortunately, by the time the audience becomes aware of the turn, they have already become invested in the other story lines and themes, making where the film ultimately ends up into a bit of a disappointment. This is not to say that the rest of the film, especially its performers and sci-fi/horror aspects, is particularly bad. In fact, the rest of the film is arguably a top-three film to release this year. Its inability to stick the landing definitely leaves you looking for more, but that should not dissuade you from appreciating the rest of the film and its otherwise great parts.