TheMovieDoctorful Reviews

Godzilla vs. Kong (2021)

The Best Wide Release Since Us

[10/10 · 6 April 2021]

I don't think that the hype and anticipation of Godzilla vs. Kong's premiere could possibly have been overstated. On an objective level, this was the first major event film since the tragic pandemic that devastated the world in March of 2020. Even with the film available to stream for free on HBO Max at home, theaters were still packed with viewers hungry to experience the clash of arguably cinema's 2 most iconic characters the way it was meant to; on the big screen.

On a more subjective level, this is Adam Wingard's first major Hollywood franchise blockbuster. I've long been adamant on how Wingard is my favorite director working today and he couldn't ask for a greater responsibility than adapting this ambitious clash between cinema's greatest titans. Additionally, like the simian protagonist of his film, Wingard comes into this scenario an underdog, as most of the Legendary MonsterVerse films have tended to lean towards "bad" instead of "good." I actually liked Godzilla (2014), though it was far from great and nowhere near most of its Japanese predecessors. Kong: Skull Island was unfathomably stupid and Godzilla: King of the Monsters was one of my worst films of 2019.

I am happy to say that Adam Wingard has beat the odds and crushed the bell on this proverbial high striker.

For fans that complained about the lack of focus on the Kaiju in previous Godzilla films, lament no longer. This is entirely their show and, unlike the previous Legendary MonsterVerse films, treats them with respect and engrossment as developed and fleshed out characters rather than titanic death machines of destruction. Kong is the lovable, goofy underdog, very true to his characterization in the original Showa King Kong vs. Godzilla of the 1960s. His very first introduction is an endearingly lethargic and light hearted morning routine played to 60s pop heartthrob Bobby VInton's cover of Over the Mountain, Across the Sea. Complimenting this friendly characterization is Kong's love and gravitation towards children; specifically towards a sweet Skull Island native named Jia, played with moving concern and raw, beating heart by the immensely talented newcomer, Kaylee Hottle.

Kong is nowhere near as intimidating or imposing as Godzilla, and Wingard recognizes this, giving the character a deeply satisfying hero's journey that slowly takes him from lovable, childlike loser to proud warrior and descendant of a prestigious family legacy to heir to the throne for the King of the Monsters. It's not just a massive improvement from Kong's sedentary and passive role in Skull Island, it's one of the most emotionally resonant and strongest character arcs in blockbuster history, hinging entirely on the base elements of filmmaking due to its focus on a silent character.

Much has been made of Godzilla not having as much a focus in the narrative as Kong and I think this criticism is rather overblown. Godzilla has always worked best in mystery and one of the best aspects of the 2014 film was its adherence to keeping him always somewhat of an enigma. It's a similar case here, but it's also the most character and development that Godzilla has had since 2004's Tokyo S. O. S. In Godzilla vs. Kong, he plays the unprecedented dual role of both minor antagonist and mentor. He's getting too old to fight titans and there are many indications (especially later in the film) that he's not quite as quick as he used to be. Godzilla needs someone new to take over as heir and the headstrong Kong makes for the most credible candidate. The radioactive reptile puts Kong through hell testing his abilities, but that moment of acceptance and respect he finally lays upon the mighty ape when deeming him worthy to claim the throne when he leaves is an immensely powerful moment of visual storytelling.

Many have claimed that a Godzilla film doesn't need strong human characters to be good. That's nonsense. A good Godzilla movie needs strong characters and story just as much as every other film and, while they don't have quite the development Kong or Godzilla do, they're still the best the MonsterVerse has had by far. Millie Bobbie Brown's Madison Russell actually has a personality and motivations that make sense this time around, which is already an improvement on her blank slate from King of the Monsters and make for a much stronger performance. Rebecca Hall has never been better in a very Sarah Harding-esque stubborn and reckless adventurer sort of role, it's a shame she doesn't do more pulp characters like this. Demian Bechir's Walter Simmons is a bit obvious as the human villain, but his performance is so genuinely scary and monstrous that I didn't even mind.

Stealing the show from the entire human cast, however, is Brian Tyree Henry as Bernie Hayes. One of the funniest comic relief characters in decades, Hayes plays the character as endearingly awkward and eccentric with a big heart and oozing charisma. His podcast conspiracy theorist easily could have come across as caricature, but he's actually a very interesting character, a hopeless soul trying to find cryptic meaning in a world that's lost purpose. A scatter brained, brilliant underdog genuinely trying to do the right thing in a position of very little power. While Kong's arc and his relationship with Jia comprise most of the heart in the film, Bernie's wonderful portrayal of a lovable lower class maverick has plenty of soul on its own.

There's so much I want to talk about here. I could talk about how this film has the best soundtrack I've heard since Spider-Verse. I could talk about how the vivid, fluorescent use of the Hong Kong cityscape creates a visual style completely distinct and different for an over 30 film franchise of Godzilla movies. I could talk about how this is probably the scariest and most culturally relevant take on Mechagodzilla of all time. All I need to tell you is that the IMAX screening I attended applauded 5 times during this movie. It's clearly doing something right.

The Relic (1997)

A Meticulously Crafted Monster Film

[10/10 · 28 March 2021]

It really is such a shame that people write Peter Hyams off after the letdown of 2010: A Space Odyssey. Left to his own devices, he's an absolutely spellbinding craftsman of a filmmaker and one of the defining directors of 90s Hollywood. This is especially true of his Horror films, 1999's End of Days, a thinly written, but phenomenally directed apocalyptic action film combining numerous aesthetic cinematic styles prominent of the decade, and more successfully, 1997's The Relic. Hyams' passion and meticulous directorial vision ooze from every cloaked shadow of this high brow monster film.

Following in the vein of all the great Gothic classics of Horror, The Relic's use of darkness does a perfect job building the suspense for the ultimate reveal of its star creature as we gradually see more and more of its physical appearance. That lighting only gets gloomier and gloomier before we get that wonderful fill reveal, the film's grand marble and stone set locations soon find themselves as drenched in water as they are in silhouette. It's almost as if the Field Chicago Museum of Natural History itself is slowly sinking out of a clean and passive civilization and into a wild jungle wilderness.

Many of the best monster films use their vicious beasts as a reflection of the age old conflict between the natural and civilized world. In Hyams' The Relic, the civilized world's exoticization and fetishization of nature is realized through the Kothoga beast, an otherworldly abomination sharing reptilian, mammalian and insectoid traits right at home in an egotistical gallery of pillaged cultural treasures and precious heirlooms. Kothoga's horrifying brutality comes across less like demonic and more Biblically marvelous, a living foreign plague unleashed in Chicago's local monument to Western colonialism.

If you know my thoughts on Fallen Kingdom, you know I have a real appreciation for proper Einsteinian editing and The Relic surprisingly features it in spades in a way that both amplifies the scares and supports the themes. One of my favorite sequences involves the affluent socialites of Chicago mingling carelessly over meaningless matters while Detective D'Gosta's blue collar team of officers are fighting for their lives in the dark muck of the sewers below.

Of course, Hyams' is only helped by a stellar cast who's never been better. Tom Sizemore is a brilliant and often underutilized actor that I've loved in supporting roles in films like True Romance and Dreamcatcher. Here, he proves himself more than capable of leading man chops playing Detective Vincent D'Gosta. Sizemore's sarcastic comic wit and urban grit are expected, but what catches me off guard is just how likable Sizemore's performance makes the character. He's tough, but not a bully, and imbued with a sense of fairness, empathy and honor rare from cinematic cops. "Pot's a misdemeanor." Sizemore's D'Gosta scolds a callous colleague. "Decapitation seems a bit severe."

Playing opposite Sizemore's D'Gosta is Penelope Ann Miller's Dr. Margo Green. Ann Miller's Margo makes for a proper 90s scream queen; uncompromising, proactive and with a stubborn streak to rival Detective D'Gosta's. A classically trained stage actor, Ann Miller brings just the right level of spunk to her mousy museum scientist, coming off as a contemporary Evelyn Ankers. While their obstinate streak does help Margo and Vincent to bond, it thankfully only extends to friendship rather than waste time forcing a romance where none is needed.

It's impossible to talk about The Relic without mentioning those jaw dropping special effects. The genuinely sickening and almost disturbing gore effects and chilling, instantly distinctive sound design are impressive enough, but the combination of very naturally moving CGI and powerful, terrifying animatronics work ranks right up there with the likes of the Jurassic Park films for lifelike digital and practical integration. There isn't one single shot where the Kothoga doesn't feel like a real, grounded creature.

The Relic is a criminally underrated creature feature and one of the best Horror films to come out of an exceptionally strong decade. With a smart script, beautiful direction and special effects that remain state-of-the-art to this day, it's a must watch for anyone with even a remote interest in the monster film genre, especially those asking for something more artful.

Frankenstein (1931)

An Iconic, Timeless Horror Tragedy

[10/10 · 31 October 2020]

I cannot overstate how enormously influential James Whale's Frankenstein has been on me as a director and writer. It's the film that put American Horror on the map, but to simplify its massive achievement so plainly would be a gross disservice. What Whale did was create a massive, captivating fairy tale world of men and monsters, as sweepingly romantic as it is unsettlingly eerie and disturbing. Even minor side characters like Fritz, Victor Clerval and Dr. Waldman carry so much intrigue and emotional gravitas they could easily hold up films of their own. Given that, it goes without saying that the main players are truly three dimensional, rich and fully realized. Whale does more to make his characters feel like real, multi-faceted people in 1 hour and 10 minutes than most directors today can manage in 2.

Henry Frankenstein is such a fascinating protagonist, anchored by a all-time great performance from Colin Clive. Right from the beginning, the way Clive's Frankenstein salivates at a freshly buried corpse, holding an expression that can only be described as hungry eyes, it's clear this character is deeply mentally unstable. That being said, the more we see of Henry in his interactions with loved ones, the more relatable and sympathetic he becomes. Clive carries such a sincere anxiety in his vocal delivery whenever interacting with his fiance Elizabeth or old mentor Dr. Waldman that suggests that he knows his ambition has become a toxic compulsion, he really does try to create a sort of alter-ego locked away in his old castle, his delicate double life almost evokes that of an addict and it's extremely compelling.

Boris Karloff is one of my favorite actors of all-time and right from his first appearance in the film, he immediately commands pity and compassion. That shot of him reaching up to the light of the moon outside is tragic and moving on such a subconscious level, especially given the way Karloff portrays The Monster as an innocent toddler trapped in the body of a superhuman. In a way, his warmth and kindness almost makes him more frightening. When he throws Maria into the pond, the look in his eyes conveys not a hint of malice or ill intent, but wonder and love. He doesn't kill and destroy intentionally, he's an abomination who doesn't even know what he is, let alone the freakish strength he's been given. Who knows what deadly mayhem he could stumble his way into?

With an endearing, self destructive monster and a unsettlingly relatable hero, the film does a great job creating a rivalry between 2 lovable, but deeply flawed, leads and really allows its audience to decide whose plight deserves out investment more; either we want to see Henry Frankenstein overcome his demons of obsession or Frankenstein's Monster find understanding and peace in a violent world. Of course, this isn't possible as long as they both live. One of them must die, tragedy must have its day.

Mae Clarke's Elizabeth Lavenza is deeply underrated. I confess, I do prefer Valerie Hobson's more consistently unhinged and disturbed take, but Lavenza's headstrong, confident woman of science trying to ignore the nightmare her husband has unleashed is an excellent take, nonetheless. I like to imagine that Shelly herself would be proud of Whale's dignified and strong characterization of Elizabeth, especially decades before these kind of scientifically gifted female characters would be commonplace on screen.

Every shot in this film is absolutely beautiful, to the level they could be displayed in an art museum. Whale's direction is beautiful, epic and grand, but also lonely and isolating. Even in happy or romantic scenes, his wideshots always give the feeling that the film's moments of peace and tranquility are just that; moments. The fact that Whale was able to accomplish such gorgeously desolate images in a film almost entirely on backlot with extremely limited tech and constant interference is so unbelievably inspiring.

A beautiful masterpiece and one of the greatest films ever made. A must watch for any lover of cinema, genre fan or not.

Get Shorty (1995)

Travolta's Best! Hail to the King!

[10/10 · 29 September 2020]

There's no way to get around it, John Travolta has become a meme. From his soft hearted assassin in Pulp Fiction to his Nu Metal alien in Battlefield Earth. From his genderbent 50s mom in Hairspray, to his lock jawed gangster in Gotti. He's a Hollywood personality we love to snicker with and at. That being said, it's very important to remember that none of this is due to a lack of a talent. Much like Nicolas Cage, Travolta is an actor with so much oozing personality that it can truly consume the role, the scenery, even the entire film if a director doesn't know exactly what they want from him. Enter Get Shorty, Travolta's finest performance in an illustrious, highly accomplished career.

Barry Sonnenfeld's outstanding direction has a lot to do with that. Sonnenfeld has always such a charming, hyperbolic comic style to his films, an exaggerated and cartoony truth that can be seen in the first Men in Black as well as his Addams Family adaptation. Get Shorty sees that style at its best and most refined, a colorful, slick pulp film combining the best aspects of 90s indie cinema with vintage throwback. That smooth, sexy, Jazz musical score and poppy, colorful 90s film filter are just so satisfying. The role of Chili Palmer, the cool and confident eccentric who's strange and sincere enough to feel relatable and aspirational despite his larger than life persona, was tailor made for Travolta. He gets to flex that wonderful charisma and natural weirdo likability while always seeming clear, focused and consistent in his character; a stubborn, wisecracking movie buff looking for a second chance and riding on a winning smile and assuring tone.

It's not just Travolta that shines, however. Gene Hackman gives a career best performance here as well in a role much more submissive, meek and diminutive than the forceful, dominant roles that the actor usually takes on. His Harry Zimm is perhaps the funniest part of the entire film, think Ed Wood through the lens of the Coen brothers and you get a pretty solid idea of his performance. It's almost a shame we haven't seen him take similar awkward and dorky roles since.

"Second chance in Hollywood" stories are rather hit-or-miss, especially with such a ludicrously impressive main character, but the uncommon moments of authenticity found in Get Shorty in regards to both the dangerous, risky, high stakes world surrounding Chili and the character's slow unraveling into someone of genuine humility and grounded nature truly elevates it above the pack.

1995 was a killer year for movies and Get Shorty was one of its absolute best films. Fun, stylish and phenomenally acted with a big heart, it's a must watch for any fellow Travolta fan.

Hereditary (2018)

Believe The Hype

[10/10 · 3 July 2020]

This is what I was waiting for years; the critical darling, film snob fellated Horror movie that actually delivers on every bit of hype promised. Hereditary is a gripping and terrifying nightmare of a film, one I consider myself absolutely blessed to have caught in theaters. Like the best Horror films, Hereditary expertly balances the line between tragedy both epic and intimate. Even before Charlie meets her positively grotesque death (one of the most shocking and upsetting moments I've had the pleasure of witnessing on screen), just the broken and estranged dynamic of this family trying desperately to maintain warmth and love in a cruel, disempowering world is just heartbreaking. That this destined tragedy occurs right when the Graham family is trying to give themselves a second chance just makes it all the more agonizing. Having grown up in a similarly unstable and dysfunctional home to the one established here, Hereditary almost played like a worst case scenario of my teenage fears living in a house of bottled guilt and toxic narcissism on all parts. I saw much of my own family in the Grahams', myself included, and while nothing can quite capture the fears and feelings of unease having to grow in that kind of environment, I'll be damned if Ari Aster's wide-shot, utterly misanthropic fever dream doesn't come close to catching that lightning in a bottle.

Hereditary's editing is maybe the only example this decade that could give Uncut Gems a run for its money. The zoom in transitions from Annie's dollhouses into the only slightly less artificial mortal world, the dream-like cross dissolves ominously preceding new emotional lows for these tormented characters, even the extended shots (a trend I'm usually annoyed by) are always used with a true sense of purpose and intent on capturing what these characters are feeling.

The direction is so impressive that I'd argye newcomer Ari Aster essentially boosted the prestige of the entire A24 Horror brand by it. The singularly unique use of soft pastels, the wide range of lighting techniques to convey mood, this is a positively gorgeous film. As it turns out, it sounds just as impressive as it looks, the raging, thundering musical cues almost taking on a personality and character all their own, screaming aggression and demonic influence.

Toni Collette heaped great tons of praise for her performance as Annie Graham and rightly so. She manages to create a matriarch both insidiously narcissistic and heart-wrenchingly sympathetic, even disturbingly relatable. That being said, Alex Wolff's performance as Peter Graham was woefully underrated. The fact people have the gall to call his raw, gritty, deeply unsightly crying "funny" really frustrates me. Frankly, he didn't get hate because his crying was unconvincing. He got hate because his performance was realistic and passionate on a downright uncomfortable level.

While we're on the subject of undeserved criticism, I don't find anything "funny" about the last 15 minutes either. If anything, the ghastly, hideously violent proceedings of the ending were the only way to end a film this operatic and grand in scale. This is a story of gods and demons more than it is one of human beings, and those entities want to show Peter all their terrible wonders before they finally take what they want. The way a possessed Annie looks at Peter, amused and entertained at his horror, suggests a sadistic playfulness that's positively blood-curdling.

Hereditary is everything that A24 Horror should aspire to be, the gold standard by which I measure all of their genre features. Terrifying, emotional and filled with beating pathos, it's a film that has more than earned its treasured place in the hearts of millennial Horror fans.

Paranormal Activity 4 (2012)

The Most Underrated of the Paranormal Activity Films

[10/10 · 3 July 2020]

If Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones is the Revenge of the Sith of the Paranormal Activity films (the often unfairly dismissed best in the franchise with a decently sized cult fanbase), Paranormal Activity 4 is its Attack of the Clones; the universally hated black sheep of the franchise that I find to easily be one of the best. The unraveling from nostalgic recording of childhood to the exposure of genuinely monstrous parenting on behalf of Alex's mother Holly is as chilling as any of the film's supernatural proceedings (which are shockingly violent, scary and cruel by the standards of the franchise)

Adults making dumb decisions isn't something exactly rare in Paranormal Activity films, but Paranormal Activity 4 gets around that idea making Holly a borderline abusive matriarch and making her husband Doug a character both amusingly dopey and far more meek a presence than his wife. It does this with a surprising amount of taste, implying this in small moments very cleverly edited and never exploited. The reveal that she drugged her daughter, her refusal to listen to her daughter after she almost dies twice and shaming her for being angry about it, this isn't a character making the wrong choices because she's stupid. She's making them because she's a narcissist with very low empathy.

Kathryn Newton as Alex was a phenomenal lead. She can be funny, endearing, uplifting, emotionally broken and tragic in this film, the amount of range she shows for such a young actress (she was 15 at the time) is incredibly impressive. Her meltdown after a terrible incident in the garage is heartbreaking to witness and was easily the strongest emotional beat in the franchise at the time.

Matt Shively is an actor I've been a fan of for a while (his performance as Chip in Jennifer's Body: The Musical was better than the original) and he absolutely kills it as Ben. He brings such an innocence and such a light hearted naïveté that helps to make him a truly likable comic relief. I was genuinely upset at his gruesome and frightening end.

The film is pound for pound scarier to me than any of its predecessors. Robbie is a terrifying presence whose name should have gone up there with infamous scary kids like Esther or Damien. His blank stare, his mysterious origins, the creepy way he prances around in the night. There are some inspired visual scares here that are violent, intense, creative and often fairly subtle. The Kinect tracking of Toby, the crashing chandelier, the self operating train, the falling knife, the nightmarish tub scene...None of those were as scary as so much of the boring filler we got in 1 or 2? That's without even mentioning the ending, a violent Satanic spookhouse nightmare through the eyes of a young teenager with the world ahead of her.

So, we have a film with great scares, natural humor, great editing, actual thematic depth and strong lead performances...Why is it that this is so strongly hated again?

Because it was the 4th entry in a franchise that got yearly releases. If Letterboxd existed at the time of the Halloween or Friday the 13th sequels releases, those would garner the same harsh criticism that these movies get. "All the movies are the same!" "They're lazy and repetitive!" "They're cashgrabs of a trash franchise!" It's not that these films are bad, it's that every Horror fan has fuzzy memories of their personal generation of Horror. Most reviewers and critics working today grew up with the likes of Freddy, Jason and Michael, so "Toby" just doesn't appeal to them. That being said, how many adults in their time dismissed their favorite slashers as artless trash while gushing over the Universal Monsters?

Try to do a mental experiment with this film; pretend you have never seen a Paranormal Activity film before. Pretend this was the first entry into the franchise and the first piece of caught found footage Horror in America since The Blair Witch Project. You're far more likely to enjoy it then than as "another Paranormal Activity sequel."

Time will be kind to these movies, but Paranormal Activity 4 was always great.

An American Werewolf in London (1981)

A Theatrical Masterpiece

[10/10 · 8 May 2020]

It's a miracle a film like this got as well respected and beloved over time, given how weird and unconventional it is. If you go back and read the original reviews, critics weren't kind to it, treating it as little more than a sloppy gimmick. If Nostalgia Critic or YMS or any of their ilk were doing their thing around the late 80s or early 90s on HBO or something, they'd likely slam the film for its bizarre nature. Nevertheless, the film has become one of the most celebrated cult Horror films of all time and for good reason. There's a sincerity and a genuineness to its eccentricities; the awkwardly honest and wooden dialogue, the uncomfortably raw performances, the intentionally and unsettlingly anachronistic musical cues, the vulgar, carnal nature of the film's sexuality and violence. An American Werewolf in London is a weird film, making up for its lack of Gothic sensibilities with an abstract nightmare tone and a big heart.

The most frequent point of praise directed towards the film is in regards to its special effects and it's not hard to see why. Rick Baker practically created the market for Special FX Makeup artists with his groundbreaking work on this film. David's transformation from man-to-wolf feels outright demonic and otherworldly, his crunching and reforming skeletal structure something that his frail, lanky human body barely knows how to react too. The work on David's face as it screams and cries its way into a lupine snout is simultaneously moving and horrifying, both unprecedented in the history of werewolf films and unbeaten by the transformations of any successor. It's perhaps my personal favorite special effect on film history, boosted by some truly sickening and grotesque sound design. The gore effects aren't quite as cited, but they're equally disturbing and effective.

Perhaps just as impressive, but rarely as mentioned, is the film's editing. This is easily one of the best edited films I've ever watched, within or outside the Horror genre. From the cross dissolves of David and Jack's seemingly innocent sunset stroll on the moors to the frantic, rapid choppy cutting of Jack's brutal death to the slow and nightmarish way David's werewolf attacks move, cutting off right before the animal can strike (Jack's scream of "Its killing me!" haunted my nightmares for a while, along with that hideous howl of the titular lycanthrope). An American Werewolf in London is a true testament to the power and terror that great post production can bring to a an already exquisitely made Horror film.

The performances and dialogue are wonderfully hyperbolic and theatrical. They're full of character and subtleties that are hidden underneath the over-the-top script and direction. There is a method to John Landis' madness; the world of An American Werewolf in London is raw and awkward in a way that I think all of the best werewolf films are. There's a pathos to the werewolf story that will always demand some soaring melodrama. "I'm torn between feeling very sorry for you and finding you very attractive" says Nurse Alex (played by the phenomenal Jenny Agutter in one of my favorite performances in Horror history) is blunt and raw in a way that isn't common in much 80s Horror. Perhaps my favorite moment like this This is isn't just one of the best films ever made, it one of the most complete visions of an auteur ever presented.

The performances feel passionate and rough in a way that so rarely gets truly appreciated. David Naughton plays his David Kessler growing more shocked and slowly consumed by the wonky and absurd nightmare that he's found himself in. His eyes are so expressive and soulful, it's a crime he hasn't done much other Horror. This is very much Jenny Agutter's show, however, and she's absolutely electrifying in the role of Nurse Alex Price. Her voice carries such a confident and strong wisdom, bringing to life a character both awkward and seductive. The revelation of her love for David in his final moments is such an authentic and heart wrenching moment from the nuanced and commanding actress.

Speaking of, can we get into how interesting Nurse Price is as a character? Her sarcastically comedic side makes for an interesting substitute for the similar character of Jack Goodman after his death and I think that their similar wisecracking nature is what really attracts David to Alex to begin with.

I'm almost curious if there was any subtext of jealousy Jack held to Price. Frankly, Price is certainly the more reasonable and compassionate of the two. If Jack really is real and not just a delusion, it begs so many questions that I would never be interested to ask with so many others.

An American Werewolf in London is yet another testament to the unrivaled theatricality of the werewolf in monster Horror. It's an emotionally powerful and genuinely scary tribute to the absurdities of young adulthood told through the lens of your strangest nightmares.

Beware the moon and stick to the moors.

Onward (I) (2020)

Pixar's Best in Years!

[9/10 · 24 March 2020]

Onward is the first great film of 2020 for me and easily Pixar's best film since Inside Out. I've heard many complain that this is far from Pixar's best, but this is easily in the top 4 for me along with Toy Story 2 and Monsters Inc.

I had my doubt going into this one, since I'm not a fan of Dan Scanlon's Monsters University, but I think he's really learned from the mistakes of that film and changed his ways as a filmmaker. He veers more away from world building this time around (the biggest weakness of Monsters University) and focuses much more heavily on character building, which definitely seems to be more his strength.

For just one example, take the way he handles brothers Ian and Barley. It begins as a typical "cowardly dweeb finds his inner strength" story with Ian as the hero and Barley the sidekick, but slowly and naturally transitions into Barley's hero's journey as the film goes on. Ian is a kid with his life ahead of him while Barley is quickly running out of time to make something of himself and the film understands that when it exposes him as the true hero. It's a refreshingly different and clever examination of an introvert wearing the mask of confidence that I'm surprised that the company behind Toy Story 4 was capable of pulling it off.

I absolutely adored the Corey character. It's Olivia Spencer's funniest performance in decades and the film actually gives her solid motivation behind her fall from grace that isn't seen in similar redemptive character arcs. For such a fantastical film, Onward is still steeped in grounded themes and moral consequences, and I absolutely loved that.

Of course, a big piece of what makes that work is the voice acting and the animation. Pratt's Barley falls into this sweet spot between the jaded figure of tragedy of Owen Grady and the goofy man child of Starlord, he's always fully convincing as either. Tom Holland is frankly a much better voice actor than a physical one and his performance as Ian may be a career best. The character designs have as much imagination as they do personality, these are some of the most interesting I've seen in years. A warforged High School dragon near the end is particularly inspired and even genuinely creepy.

The only problem I really found in the film was that I feel the stepdad character was fairly underdeveloped with how much screen time he had, but the arcs of Ian, Barley and Corey more than make up for it in the overall narrative.

It's a good thing Onward came when it did, because I was starting to lose hope in 2020 films. That being said, it breaks my heart that it's being labeled one of the "lesser Pixar films", especially when things like the Cars films and The Incredibles 2 exist. At the very least, this actually had a soul somewhere, which those films severely lacked.

Leprechaun 3 (1995 Video)

"Look out, Vegas! I'm takin' ovah!"

[9/10 · 24 March 2020]

Something about 1995 and great films set in Las Vegas.

I had fond memories of Leprechaun 3, but this is one of the funniest Horror comedies I have ever watched, it's so much better than a Leprechaun sequel needs to be.

The performances are universally great, the human characters are actually interesting and developed unlike the first 2 films, the practical effects are incredibly impressive given the tiny budget, the comedy is hilarious (Like, Tucker & Dale levels of hilarious), the kills are creative as they are brutal, the world building and lore is well thought out and creative. This is everything that the first film should have been and more.

It also improves on its predecessors in more unexpected ways, like having the Leprechaun's victims put up more of a fight and choosing a location that really fits the themes of the story; what better place to set a tale of slowly consuming, unquenchable greed and its catastrophic ripples than Vegas? The film makes the most of its setting as well, the cinematography is among the most impressive and oddly enchanting I've seen in a franchise blockbuster.

It's a shame that people are likely to dismiss this one due to its attachment to such a notorious series, but it's a surprisingly well made and even clever black comedy that I would highly recommend to fans of the strange and campy.

Dracula (1979)

The Best Dracula Film to Date!

[10/10 · 24 March 2020]

Readers of my reviews know all too well how much I appreciate the pathos, the Gothic tragedy and the scale of the Universal monster films. Many of my favorite modern blockbusters of this decade are spiritual successors to these classics, most of them produced by Universal themselves. As it turns out, modern Gothic monster tales like The Wolfman (2010), Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom and Us owe as much of their DNA to John Badham's underrated 1979 masterpiece Dracula as they do the seminal works of James Whale and Tod Browning. I would argue that outside of the Nosferatu films, this is easily the best Dracula movie we could ever hope to get.

The story is easily the best we've seen in a Dracula film, both Nosferatu films included. The script makes the wise choice of using a smaller cast of heroes from 2 families rather than a larger cast of ragtag strangers and acquaintances like we've seen in most other Dracula films. This way, the stakes are kept more personal, more grounded and more easy to invest in, the themes or personal freedom vs. violent and primal anarchy more focused and powerful.

Frank Langella's performance is extraordinary in its range and effectiveness. He can be romantic, charismatic, commanding and above all terrifying playing the good Count as a godlike figure among men; one who commands absolute attention, adoration and fear. He makes the character feel both grounded and mythic in a way that no actor who has portrayed the character before or since has pulled off. He's a nightmare that you just don't want to accept, one that lulls you with sweet words and a convincing smile before ripping your throat out.

Kate Nelligan's performance as Lucy Seward may be superior even to Langella's more iconic performance. She's a fierce, strong willed lead and gives such an enduring screen presence and passion to the character. Her love and devotion to her Dark Prince never comes across as a compulsion or a spell, but an unwavering loyalty to the one person who seems to respect her agency and intelligence. The choice by the filmmakers to make Lucy the heroine rather than Mina or Jonathan is a divisive one, but one that ultimately works for the better. She's brighter than Jonathan in the original story and more resilient than Mina, I'm surprised she hasn't been the lead in more adaptations of the Dracula story. Regardless, Nelligan's performance as Lucy will always remain the platinum standard for the character.

Badham's direction is far beyond anything I could have hoped for this story. He shoots Dracula's descent on Whitby like an apocalyptic event, a general sense of unease and panic in the village is always felt, even if it's quiet and just bubbling beneath the surface. The atmosphere is spooky and off putting even in the day time with its dark and morose color scheme and decayed, expiring, massive Gothic setpieces, the costume design and makeup making the mourners of Dracula's rampage take on an almost ghostly visage. They make the film feel that much more operatic and the tragedy that much more heightened (both would be visual tricks we'd see expanded upon in Johnston's Wolfman 3 decades later) The sound design is as underrated as it is iconic, that chilling wolf's howl we hear over the moors is as memorable, creepy and distinctive as a certain other howl we'd be hearing in another Universal Horror just 3 years later. Just as iconic is its visual imagery, from that haunting shot of Mina seen through the web of a spider (echoed in a similar shot we would later find in Us) to Langella's animalistic, primal Count crawling the walls of the Van Helsing manor (imagery that's directly referenced in Fallen Kingdom) Between this film, Nosferatu the Vampyre and Ganja & Hess, one could almost consider the 70s a Golden Age for these kinds of vampire Gothic visual masterpieces.

Dracula (1979) is as beautiful and majestic a monster movie as it is a chilling and truly frightening one. Even if it doesn't get as much credit or popularity as Browning or Copolla's Dracula films, its impact and influence on Gothic Horror tragedy is just as important, if not more.

Ghost Rider (2007)

Dear Mark Steven Johnson...

[2/10 · 24 March 2020]

How could you do this?

Contrary to what people will say, Daredevil was not a bad or even mediocre film. Your gritty and inspired direction was outstanding even by today's standards and your script was ambitious and even thought provoking (even if the studio cut most of the bits that made sense)

Your Elektra film wasn't "good", but it wasn't unwatchable either. The script was absolutely awful, but the performances, direction and fight choreography wasn't half bad. I can watch clips of it and enjoy myself and I respect the film even if I don't like it. Honestly, as far as second entries in cinematic universes go, it could have been a lot worse (see The Incredible Hulk '08...Actually, don't see it. Ever)

So color me disappointed when your adaptation of Ghost Rider, one of my favorite comic book characters of all time, starring one of my favorite actors of all time, isn't just bad, but boring, soulless and a disservice to the genre.

Cage's performance was shockingly bad. Which is weird, Mr. Steven Johnson, when you've had a strong habit of getting great lead performances even in films that don't work. He looks more tired and disinterested than ever. We hardly even get much in the way of Cage freak outs (though I'll give you this; making him laugh at a chimp doing karate on TV was a stroke of genius) This is the man so passionate he sold his soul to save his family? I'm not buying it.

The love story feels perfunctory and incredibly sloppy, which is a major weakness given that you lean so heavily on it here. Again, how did this happen? Roxanne and Johnny are childhood sweethearts growing up in the South, these 2 should have a romance as fiery as Johnny's flaming skull. Instead, they hardly come off as even friends for most of the film.

Most shocking of all is how the film is never fun. There's no eye candy to be found with the horrendous effects and lifeless cinematography. You're the man who gave us that wonderful shot of Daredevil hanging from a Church cross, pulled straight from Guardian Devil. Why are you on such autopilot with a character with arguably more visual potential? Speaking of, the film's action sequences are also far less impressive or elaborate than Daredevil. The most Ghost Rider does in this film is throw a helicopter and shoot Blackheart with shotgun pellets that bounce like BB pellets. His fearsome Penance Stare done off-screen? Come on!

Wes Bentley's performance as Blackheart is...Good, but it doesn't fit the character. It's the same problem as Topher Grace as Venom. If he were playing a more seductive villain like Morlun or Loki, he might fit, but Blackheart is an otherworldly monster. It's a waste of a good actor's talents playing a character that doesn't fit.

To conclude, you get way more hate than you deserve Mr. Steven Johnson. Hell, I'd put you above most MCU directors and all but one DCEU director (the amazing Patty Jenkins) This is a film, unfortunately, that I can't forgive, even if I do find it unfair that it was the last blockbuster you directed. I hope your career can bounce back from it, but I also hope you've learned from its shortcomings.

Sincerely,

Your fan,

Will Walker

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

Not A Masterpiece, But An Important Post Modern Commentary Nonetheless

[8/10 · 24 March 2020]

Been meaning to talk more extensively about this one, because arguably the most divisive film of the decade deserves more than a few sentences.

I'll start off by saying that Batman v. Superman is no masterpiece. This isn't a case like the Star Wars prequels or The Wolfman (2010) or even Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom where I will die on a hill in defense of it being one of the greatest blockbusters of all time. There are big problems I have with it.

Eisenberg as Lex was an interesting experiment that I feel ultimately failed. I don't mind the more neurotic take on the character, but the script presents him as too unstable too fast. I feel the direction the film goes with Lex would only have worked as a slow descent into madness (which makes sense, given that Eisenberg's best acted scenes are near the end) It's hardly out of character for Lex to lose his mind on an increasingly obsessive quest to destroy Superman, but there doesn't seem to really be a journey with him as a villain.

Doomsday isn't handled very well here either, which is shocking given that he's so easy to get right. His entire character revolves around him being the enemy of all life, the antithesis to the preserver of life that is Superman. That point doesn't get across very well when most of the death he causes is done in self defense or confusion. He lacks weight, he lacks menace and, worst of all, he's just not intimidating.

Batman doesn't spare Superman because their mothers have the same name. I feel that's self evident at this point, but it's important to say. That's being said, the dreadful dialogue and awkward editing in that scene don't exactly paint a clear picture for Batman's motivations and definitely undermine some rich thematic material and really not-bad acting. Snyder had the right idea with Batman's redemption coming through a son pleading for his mother's life, but the execution is incredibly messy. Scenes like this are why I call Snyder an absent minded professor; he's an intelligent storyteller with smart ideas, but he lacks the wisdom and patience to execute them properly.

Being a cinematic universe film doesn't do this film very many favors either. It's hard for me to take this entirely seriously for the art house masterpiece it's trying to be, exploring deep themes like xenophobia, cultural fear and media irresponsibility, when it's also trying to sell Aquaman, Cyborg and Flash films in a movie that has nothing to do with them.

With all of that out of the way...This is still a good film.

I'm tempted to say that this is the perfect take on the Superman character. Turning him into an allegory for the plight of the American refugee, the victim of horrific prejudice, intolerance and cultural hatred from a race he truly loves unconditionally, gives pathos, vulnerability and cultural relevance to the character that we haven't seen on film before. Cavill gives an outstanding performance as Clark Kent and I had no problem believing the increasingly heavy emotional burden he had to carry in his nuanced, detailed facial acting.

On the other side, we have Affleck's Batman, easily the best performance of the character in live action. He's as intimidating, haunted and convincingly ruthless as any great supervillain and the more cruel and sinister take on the character is a fascinating departure from Bale's version of the character. This is what Batman would look like in the real world; a jaded, paranoid billionaire who spends a small fortune waging a futile war on crime sinking further and further into violent madness. Affleck's vulnerability and fragility keeps the character sympathetic without being truly empathetic, a tragic villain who only finds redemption when Superman shines a mirror on his bigoted, Right Wing jingoistic ways.

The musical score is absolutely outstanding, arguably the most iconic since Elfman's scores of the early 90s. It's epic, sweeping and does a lot of the heavy lifting in translating the film to the modern myth that Snyder is obviously trying to hard to achieve. You Are My World is a particularly moving and emotionally evocative track and easily the most memorable here.

While Batman v. Superman is far from perfect, Zack Snyder should still be proud of what he's accomplished in what's probably the best live action Batman film to date. Heartfelt, smart, grounded and more relevant today than ever, BvS is a remarkably post modern commentary in an era when superhero films rarely aspire to be anything more than repetitive diversions.

Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker (2019)

"I can't watch anymore."

[2/10 · 28 December 2019]

Rise of Skywalker is the first bad Star Wars film, but it's one that I am so glad exists. Its very existence not only foreshadows the re-appraisal of the unfairly maligned prequels, but the re-appraisal of Colin Treverrow as a director. Everything I can gather from his filmography and interviews suggests he could make a better Saga conclusion as a short film than this wretched disaster.

If you think this is going to be an evisceration of Disney or Rian Johnson or Last Jedi, I hate to tell you that I like all of those things. Last Jedi wasn't great, but I'm not gonna act like it was some awful film made by a hack either. It was an undeniably ambitious film. Not great, far from perfect, but decent.

Even as someone who didn't love Last Jedi, comparing it to this makes me sad. In fact, I feel dirty comparing this laughable, corporate and downright morally putrid video game to any Star Wars film. I previously compared it to Jason Goes to Hell, but that film has so much more charm and good intent than this.

Battlefield Earth?

Pfft, absolutely not.

That film is hilarious and made by people who were actually trying. It's a million times more entertaining than this one. It also had better performances and effects. Travolta and Whitaker also had way more chemistry than Ridley and Driver.

The "I don't care" level acting performances, horrendous-but-expensive looking CGI and surprisingly bad production values at points feels more comparable to something like Justice League or The Last Airbender.

You know what?

Comparing it to a video game would be unfair as well. I can at least have fun with bad games. The only person (and I mean the only person) who gave a damn was Ian McDiarmid, decked out in makeup that looks worse than the one from the no-budget YouTube Vader fan film that everyone hated for some reason. The only other compliment I can give it is that it boasts some inventive and slightly riveting action scenes. Just wait to watch those on YouTube.

Kylo Ren is not interesting. I am sorry, but he's not. He could have been a great Saturday Morning Cartoon villain, but he's instead a boring antihero who isn't relatable or even complex in any way. Rey does not have one single, solitary reason to love him. They don't have a childhood friendship, he called her nothing, he used and manipulated her.

Rey was only interesting to me in Last Jedi, so I'm really happy that this film strips all of her complexities and vulnerabilities to turn her into the 1 dimensional caricature of a heroine she is here. I considered leaving the theater when she practically gets praised as the greatest Jedi who ever lived. I never thought I'd see a Star Wars film weirdly supportive of an Ayn Randian world view, but here we are, friends.

Their kiss brought back memories of Ray Liotta and Leelee Sobieski's makeout session from In The Name of the King and I think that speaks for itself. They have the chemistry of 2 piles of horse manure.

You know how the whole internet lost their minds when Rian Johnson made Luke a fallible hero and everyone said it was disgraceful to his legacy? It wasn't. I can say this confidently given this film is actually disgraceful to Anakin's legacy. The hopeful and compassionate slave boy from Tatooine dies solely to delay the death of everything he ever cared about. Make all the analogies you want to what happened to the franchise here.

This film is as progressive as a 90s Turner cartoon with significantly less charm. It's what Avengers: Endgame would look like with no character development or investment or soul and if it were directed and written by Rolland Emmerich.

Wrong Turn 2: Dead End (2007 Video)

Far Too Good For Its Franchise

[10/10 · 17 October 2019]

If ever there was a film that had no right being as good as it was, it's Wrong Turn 2. A sequel to an unwatchably bad 2000s slasher that soars in every way that it's predecessor sinks. Not only that, it completely redeems and fully realized the botched premise of another terrible slasher film, Halloween: Resurrection. The film's blend of found footage reality TV with over-the-top slasher gore is funny, creepy and genuinely unpredictable. And it's a sequel to Wrong Turn of all things!

The performances are a great deal of fun all around. Erica Leerhsen is great actress who's unfortunately been saddled with mostly terrible movies (Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre '03, e.t.c) that she usually ends up being the best part of. Here, she more than proves herself as a phenomenal lead actress and one of the best anti-final girls I've ever seen. Her Nina is relatable, ferocious and surprisingly complex for a slasher lead and Leerhsen brings a great combination of grit and vulnerability to the role. This is the character that an actress of her caliber always deserved, but never got previously.

Speaking of, Texas Battle (best known for Final Destination 3 and Dragonball: Evolution...Yeah) also proves himself a better actor than his filmography would indicate. He manages to give a lot of likability and depth to a character that easily could have just been a jock stereotype. Instead, he's written as acted to be invested in and comes across as a very selfless, honorable and likable hero. I'm surprised his Jake isn't brought up more often as an example of progressive black representation in Horror films.

Ken Kirzinger, best known for playing Jason Voorhees in Freddy vs. Jason, proves himself as far more than just a body behind a hockey mask as Pa. He carries such a creepy, foreboding menace and dead stone coldness in his eyes that few monster actors can really nail. He kills and eviscerates with a real purpose and genuinely becomes his villainous character. More unexpectedly, I really bought the love and affection that he held for his family in his body and facial acting. I can see why he was cast in Freddy vs. Jason ad a more human take on his character, as he brings that same mild humanity here. It's a shame he gets so much hate merely for replacing Kane Hodder when he's a great actor in his own right, you can consider this his Hatchet so to speak.

The kills are absolutely phenomenal. Both the backwoods and found footage elements are wonderfully realized in some dispatchings that do a perfect job balancing between Looney Tunes on Meth fun and genuine terror. They're the kind of kills that the very best Friday the 13th films capture. Even better, it's not just the villains that help to contribute to those memorable kills; Henry Rollins' Dale Murphy should put a smile on the face of everyone who ever wanted to root for Michael or Jason. In fact, his kills may be the most violent and explosive (pun fully intended) of the movie. Even Nina and Jake manage to get in some pretty cathartic bloody violence against their tormentors by the end. It's always nice to see slasher heroes as brutal and relentless as the villains in these kinds of films.

The directing by Joe Lynch is so much better than the first film that it's hard to believe it belongs to the same franchise. The balance between reality TV and slasher is realized wonderfully and it really embraces what we love about both (the tragic, melodramatic backstories of the heroes, the hyperbolic violence, the memorable one liners, the outstanding practical effects, the atmosphere so thick you could cut it with a knife) while ditching what we hate (the predictable survivors, the bad acting, the awful production values) Wrong Turn 2 is definitive proof that Halloween: Resurrection, bad as it was. was onto something when it made the connection between the appeal of the slasher entertainment and millennial obsession with reality TV. It just took a mind like Lynch's to realize it.

This is also a great film for people who like their slashers with more twists and turns than a roller coaster. From the unconventional body count (the "final girl" archetype is the first one to die) to sharp tonal shifts that genuinely work (the contestants making sex jokes while eating barbecue only to find themselves snacking on a friend), it's a film that always had me on the edge of my seat wondering what was coming next.

Wrong Turn 2 is one of the biggest surprises I've ever had watching a Horror film. It's everything I wanted the first movie to be and more. If you were turned off by the first film being little more than a low effort Eliza Dukshu vehicle, I'd highly recommend checking the sequel out. It's better in every single way.

Porno (2019)

Obnoxiously, Pathetically Safe

[2/10 · 14 October 2019]

For a movie with an abundance of testicles, this film had no balls to speak of.

The admittedly excellent direction, glorious synth soundtrack, fun gore & makeup effects and decent production design can't make up for the least likable (or interesting) cast of characters I've seen in a Horror film in years and a story as predictable and cliched and unbearably slow as it is obnoxiously safe. If this film had any guts whatsoever, it would have ended with all these characters either dead or possessed and the world at an end as we know it. Instead, we get an undeserved and tacked on happy ending for a bunch of horrible people who didn't develop or regress in any way. The fact that a film with as cool a concept as this is not only not one of my favorite films of the year, but actually pretty bad, is heart wrenching. I love Succubus Horror. I love 90s teen Horror comedy. I love this film's tone and aesthetic. But the meat of Porno is rotten to the core.

This is one of the worst years for Horror since the 2000s and Porno marks yet another inexplicable disappointment that should have been a great film.

Pity.

Daniel Isn't Real (2019)

Good, But Disappointing

[7/10 · 11 October 2019]

4 years after his underrated Horror masterpiece Some Kind of Hate (which I will absolutely be reviewing at some point), Adam Egypt Mortimer returns to the Horror genre with Daniel Isn't Real. The bad news is that the film is a disappointment. The good news is that it's still good and more than proves Mortimer has serious staying power in the genre. It's certainly one of the better Horror movies released this year.

A big piece of why this film doesn't work as well as its predecessor is its love story. While the central romance in Some Kind of Hate seemed natural and genuinely heartfelt, here it feels more like a rushed after thought than anything. The ending wants to speak to the redemptive power of love, but the film never convinces us of the passion between Luke and Cassie that would inspire that kind of power. I buy the lust between the two, certainly, but not the love.

That brings us to another major problem with the film; the ending. On top of feeling extremely anti-climactic (I was genuinely stunned when the credits rolled), it was more confusing than anything and just leaves me with more questions than I already had.

Patrick Schwarzenegger is an actor that hasn't really made a lot of noise previously, but this is without a doubt the performance of his career. As Daniel, he's hilarious, charming, charismatic and occasionally rather chilling. He completely steals the show, reminding me a lot of a young Bill Skarsgard and proving that he has quite a promising career ahead of him playing wily villains. The rest of the cast does an adequate job, but this is clearly Schwarzenegger's movie first and foremost. I found myself smiling at almost all of his appearances.

The directing is gorgeous as well. With its psychedelic, dreamlike usage of pinks, reds and yellows against an eerie fog, you can almost consider this the plucky younger brother of Mandy. Credit should also be given to the astounding practical effects that give life to the film's stunning and horrific cosmic demons. The demon designs here are truly inventive and darkly gorgeous, reminiscent of something out of a Neil Gaiman comic.

While the relationship between Luke and his girlfriend Cassie doesn't work, the relationship between Luke and his mother surprisingly made up for the lack of heart in the romance. I could absolutely buy them as mother and son and not a second goes by between them where you can't feel the concern for each other's safety between the two. There are shockingly relatable moments between the two and I'm not merely talking about the wholesome ones. Miles Robbins and Mary Stuart Robinson do a wonderful job conveying an odd juxtaposition of loving closeness and expansive distance between their characters that's all too real for many parents and their children. It's the kind of dynamic rarely seen on screen between mothers and sons and it's representation is fairly important.

Mortimer balances Horror and comedy wonderfully in Some Kind of Hate and does so again here. The comedic timing of the cast is absolutely perfect, just as the gruesomeness and bizarre nature of the scares is truly haunting. Finding the right balance between Horror and comedy can prove a challenge for a lot of films, but this is something that Daniel Isn't Real soars at.

In the end, while Daniel Isn't Real isn't anywhere near where I was hoping it to be, it's still a damn good movie and certainly one of the better Horror movies of 2019.

When Black Birds Fly (2015)

A Borderline Religious Experience

[10/10 · 11 October 2019]

I can absolutely see why people wouldn't like Where The Dead Go To Die. While I personally found it to be a terrifying exploration of untreated childhood trauma and guilt complexes illustrated through the visual style of a nightmare, (and probably the best anthology I've seen), I will admit that it may have gone too far in places for some and crossed certain boundaries. What I can't understand is people not embracing this. ScreamerClauz's imagination is still as vivid and expansive as ever, but his directing is much less leering or exploitative this time around. There are many instances where he opts not to show any violence on screen at all, merely keeping its audio and having the audience piece things together by ourselves. When a visual auteur like ScreamerClauz, by now widely known for his love of various grotesqueries, won't show us acts of violence on screen, one can only imagine their depravity.

Admittedly, When Black Birds Fly isn't nearly as scary as Where The Dead Go To Die. Perhaps a piece of that is ScreamerClauz's noticeable restraint here, the film losing a fair amount of its predecessors viciousness and cruelty. It does, however, have far more juicy meat on its bones. While The Dead Go To Die takes place in a world of constant hostility, hardly giving the viewer a moment's rest from its Hell, the world of When Black Birds Fly is poisoned honey. Suffering is something that is completely ignored, passivity confused for pacifism. The film opens with Daryl saving a black bird, establishing the values of charity and compassion for the broken (in fact, the first 10 minutes of the film are oddly wholesome by ScreamerClauz's standards), yet Marius and Eden saving a presumably injured kitten is enough to topple the very foundations of Caine's Heaven. Good deeds are not valued for the sake of their goodness, but for how the rest of the world will perceive them. The Evil One wasn't cast out for being a monster, she was cast out because she was divisive. Because her banishment would be the most popular option in the eyes of Caine's people. She's probably the most feminist take we've seen on Lilith to date, not at all I was expecting coming into this film. Confusing femininity and sensitivity with weakness (both in the case of The Evil One and Lilith) was the critical mistake of both Caine and Jehovah.

Speaking of, it's very interesting how the film frames violence against women especially as something wholly ignored by patriarchy. Daryl is perfectly content calmly reading his newspaper as Norma violently conceives a demonic Hellspawn, claiming it to be her "punishment" for being seen naked. Having him show more concern for the well being of the horrific larvae she spawns may be an obvious jab at pro-life religious hypocrites, but it's hilarious nonetheless. Similarly, Caine never seems to bat an eye at the physical suffering and emotional isolation he caused The Evil One despite claiming to love her. Her suffering only becomes his concern when he theorizes she may not love him anymore. It's their ignorance to this suffering and pain that will ultimately become their damnation, as everything they fought so hard to build comes crashing down from their own lack of empathy.

I've heard criticisms at the animation and voice acting and I very much disagree with them. ScreamerClauz has a flawless talent with capturing the visual style of nightmares and the hideous animation does undeniably capture that aesthetic. It has almost no rules to be limited by, its raw expression of ideas and sensations and feelings is the most interesting thing to come out of the field of animation in years.

When Black Birds Fly is an extraordinary achievement that's just waiting to be recognized for the psychedelic and haunting masterpiece that it is. I'm enormously relieved that it's getting better reception than Where The Dead Go To Die and its cult fanbase will only grow over time.

Jurassic Park (1993)

"I wanted to give them something that wasn't an illusion."

[10/10 · 11 October 2019]

Escapist cinema doesn't get any more magical than Jurassic Park. It's a film that enchanted me as a child and awakens my inner child as an adult like no other. Every second on Isla Nublar is a reminder of nature's majesty and mystery that got me labeled "the animal fact kid" as a grade schooler. Not even just the dinosaurs, the lush, tropical greenery set against that epic, rousing score gets my attention and awe the moment Hammond's helicopter arrives on Nublar. The beauty of what Hammond and InGen have created is so hypnotizing, it's incredibly easy to forget their failures. Even its scenes of gruesome violence and death have an odd primal allure to them, the spell remaining unbroken. Those failures aren't what cynics and detractors of the franchise as a whole will tell you; the sheer act of creating dinosaurs wasn't Hammond's mistake. It was treating nature as entertainment.

The sequels, contrary to what people will say, are not bad (Outside Jurassic Park III, at least), nor do they betray the original's themes. Both The Lost World and Fallen Kingdom do a perfect job showing the utter horrors of commercializing life itself as product. The original Jurassic Park, however, has a different goal. It's to suck the audience into the illusion that said commercialization is something positive and valid. Hammond didn't set up Jurassic Park as a nature preserve to study these animals for scientific purposes or to create a new ecosystem. There's a reason he describes Jurassic Park as a "theme park" first and foremost. There's a reason he puts a macho, toxically masculine Great White Hunter in charge of security instead of a biologist or paleontologist (who he only seeks out when faced with legal trouble) "Everyone in the world has the right to enjoy these animals!" he practically gloats. They're his personal toys, created for the purpose of amusement and blatant exploitation. They're denied even the basic right to breed outside a controlled environment, every baby's birth oversought by Hammond himself (who will certainly forget about each and every one) rather than a responsible and doting parent. While Hammond's characterization is certainly less malevolent than in Michael Crichton's rich source material, he's still very much unsympathetic and unsubstantial on multiple fronts. It's no accident that he began life as a professional charlatan working a flea circus.

It's curious how people always want to highlight Ian Malcolm as the voice of reason here. In this film, at least, he comes off more like a contrarian cynic than anything (He's wiser and more idealistic in The Lost World, but only after spending time in the company of death in the first film) If anyone provides sincere reason in this film, it's Dr. Ellie Sattler. From the very beginning, she's not just throwing cheap shots like Malcolm, she's making genuine observations of Hammond's failures. Picking poisonous plants for display in his visitor center for aesthetic reasons, bringing dinosaurs into an environment they don't fully recognize to interact regularly with a species it has never met, allowing poisonous berries in dinosaur enclosures purely because an accident hasn't happened yet, these are very specific problems that Ellie is quick to point out. One of my biggest (and only) problems with the sequels was that Ellie never really had a presence in any of them despite being the biggest role model and smartest characater in the original film by far. Malcolm has plenty of development in the first film, as does Grant, but Ellie feels like the most constructive and positive force against the carnage of Jurassic Park by far.

The flea circus scene between Ellie and Hammond is one of my favorites in film history. The battle between self righteous ego ("Creation is an act of pure will!") and well rounded logic ("It's still the flea circus!") is as brutal and staying as any dinosaur attack. It wonderfully highlights both Ellie's strength while bringing Hammond's pathos and narcissism to the forefront. It's not quippy or catchy and it's rarely quoted, but it's easily the best written and acted scene in the film as well as the most powerful.

Everyone's discussed it, but I would be remiss not to talk about the revolutionary special effects. The animatronics and CGI perfectly balance the weight of these prehistoric titans with their stunning speed. The biggest problem with modern CGI is its negligence to recognize the complexity and rawness of flesh, of muscle, of brawn. Jurassic Park's achievement in capturing that rawness is something seen maybe 2 - 5 times a decade. At least one of those times per decade, it's by a film in this very franchise. It's a standard practically unreachable by an age that uses it as a crutch more than a tool.

The musical score has more than earned its place as a classic, but even that has a depth to it that goes unrecognized. Its frequent use of Congo drums after its initial use of a rousing, trumpeting anthem definitely fits with a story about capitalist exploitation of the unknown for its own petty entertainment. It really speaks to the level of detail put into the entire production that even the musical score brings weight to the themes.

Martin Scorsese recently made the statement that superhero films were "theme park cinema", which has caused a fair amount of uproar, but films like this make me question whether that's a derogatory statement at all. Theme park films can be high brow. They can have character and themes and genuine weight, they can inspire and captivate and teach. Jurassic Park is a prime example of that and one of the most nuanced, critical and thematically rich blockbusters of all time that never loses its rewatchability.

Hell Fest (2018)

Hell Yes for Hell Fest!

[9/10 · 11 October 2019]

2018 was the anti-2019 for film. While every film that I hyped myself up for in 2019 ended up completely and totally disappointing me, I found myself loving a lot of 2018 films that I really had no hope for. Case in point, Hell Fest. Here you have a Horror movie directed by the man who gave us the worst Paranormal Activity film at all with trailers that seemed to spoil every major kill. I had hopes for a good slasher (the concept alone was sound), but I was well prepared for disappointment. Thankfully, that disappointment never came. Hell Fest hits every single one of its ambitions as a simple, but brilliantly executed, slasher film and practically oozes with franchise potential.

The characters aren't the deepest, but they're still fairly interesting and they make up for in likability what they lack in depth. Bex Taylor Klaus as Punk princess Taylor has to be my favorite. Nearly everything she said had me in stitches and I was constantly worried about her getting knocked off, she's a genuinely funny comic relief character and her love and passion for all things dark and creepy is contagious. Reign Edwards brings a refreshing and rarely seen sweetness to her role as the adventurous and rowdy party girl Brooke and she was another character that kept me in serious suspense rooting for her survival. On top of that, all the teens have perfect chemistry and I had no problem buying this was a close circle of friends enjoying a Halloween theme park.

I've heard people say that the film wasn't violent enough for a slasher and I honestly wonder if I simply watched a different movie. From mallets smashing heads open like watermelons to hook impalings to syringes through the eye, Hell Fest lets us know right from the beginning that it means business with that R-rating. I was truly caught off guard with the level of brutality behind the kills here, it felt no different than a strong Friday the 13th or Halloween entry.

Also unexpected was the level of suspense the film was able to create. The environment of the theme park and The Other's invisibility in a crowd of masked strangers makes for a truly ominous atmosphere where our heroes are never truly safe. There's a real feeling any of these teens could die at any moment. It's not just that it's unfamiliar, it's that it's unfamiliarity you don't see coming. It's the escapism of vacation, if escapism, and it's no less dangerous than a haunted forest or mansion.

The unique circumstances of the environment also mean that the survival of these characters depends not on sad and outdated tropes, but familiarity of one's surroundings. Halloween theme parks have their own set of rules as unique as they are obscure and it's fascinating to see how the difference between life and death depends on how well these teens understand them. It's a far smarter script than a mere roller coaster like this necessarily deserves. Even the ending is rather clever, leaving the door open for a whole spectrum of creative possibilities from new killers to new masks to new environments.

Hell Fest isn't exactly Earth shattering, but it's a surprisingly investing, funny and even occasionally scary slasher that has me very excited at the prospect of sequels.

Joker (I) (2019)

"There is no punchline."

[4/10 · 11 October 2019]

Well, that was thoroughly mediocre.

Keep in mind, I didn't say "terrible." It's not one of the worst films of the year. Hell, it's not even the worst comic book film of the year (Hellboy and Polar are fighting it out for that title) It's not "good" though either.

Most of that falls on the script. It's so worked up in telling you how important it is that it forgets to even tell you why. There are a LOT of expository scenes here, and while the actors do a shocking job selling them (Every single performance in the film is outstanding), their acting can't make up for how heavy handed they get. The closest thing the film has to an ideology is this really juvenile South Park thing of "Both sides are equally bad, but at least the Right Wing aren't pussies!" Even worse though, because this film is begging to be taken 100% seriously all the time outside of about a handful of scenes (Which are the best stuff in the movie. Seriously, if most of the film had that tone, it would be a masterpiece.) If this was going for a satirical or campy route, it might have worked, but it just doesn't. Don't even get me started on that insanely manipulative musical score. At least it's not pro-incel like I thought it was gonna be.

On top of all that, the film doesn't even pretend to care about the source material. This was very clearly an anti-Occupy art thing that was forced into being a Joker film at the last second. A name change here, an Easter Egg there.

Like I said though, it's not terrible. Joaquin Phoenix is dynamite here and I really do hope that he gets that Oscar. He managed to generate sympathy for me from a character I was absolutely positive would never get any from me. I'd even argue that de Niro deserves a Best Supporting nomination here, this is the best performance he's given in decades and he gives even Phoenix a run for his money.

The cinematography is gorgeous as well. It definitely nails the aesthetic of a grimy 70s crime thriller and there really isn't any comic book film out there that I can say matches this film's aesthetic outside of maybe Watchmen. Pretty much every shot in this film would make a gorgeous screensaver.

While Joker certainly isn't the worst thing ever, it's still plagued by shortcomings. I can see both arguments for how it's a terrible and amazing film. For me, it was a whimper when it should have been a bang and that falls entirely on the shoulders of screenwriter Todd Phillips.

Batman & Robin (1997)

A Dreadful Film, But Not For The Reasons Most Often Cited

[1/10 · 23 September 2019]

Almost everyone had slated Batman & Robin. It's almost become a cliche to bash on it. For once, I have to agree with popular consensus; Batman & Robin is a terrible movie. However, at the same time, I think it's terrible for reasons that very rarely get brought up. It's not bad because it's campy or because Batman's costume has nipples or because Arnold Schwarzenegger is Mr. Freeze. This film could retain all those aspects and still be good. Batman & Robin is bad because it's at war with itself. Nearly every potentially thought provoking or interesting creative decision is fundamentally undermined by another decision.

For example, let's look at one of the most praised (and worst) scenes of the film; Bruce's conversation with his dying butler Alfred. In this scene, Alfred vents to Bruce that Batman started as a means to prevent mortality, but that Bruce must understand that even The Caped Crusader can't cheat death. It's an interesting and relevant point to the character, juxtaposed by 2 villains who are primarily motivated by a desire to preserve life. The problem is that not only does this scene have no payoff, but the story itself betrays its own messaging. In the end, Batman does save Alfred from death via an insulting Deus Ex Machina From Mr. Freeze. So, as it turns out, Alfred was wrong and Batman really can cheat death. God forbid we have anything but a happy ending for the kids, even if everything previously seemed to be setting up tragedy. To clarify, Batman & Robin isn't bad when it's being silly. It's bad when it's being serious.

The film's confused and contradictory messaging can be felt in its villains as well. A story like this about the inevitability of mortality and our faulty attempts to prevent death calls for villains who cannot accept the fate of all living beings to die; Mr. Freeze is motivated by a desire to prevent his wife's death, Poison Ivy is motivated by a desire to protect the world's dying plant life. In theory, this should be genius, especially considering the fantastic casting of Uma Thurman as Poison Ivy and, surprisingly, Arnold Schwarzenegger as Mr. Freeze (who probably gives the best performance in the film). Again, the problem is in execution. Mr. Freeze will spend one scene crying over home movies of his wife and then the next scene laughing maniacally as he kills civilians randomly seemingly for the sake of slaughter. Freeze in this film is a character lacking in both motivation and in plan, there is absolutely no drive to him. This has nothing to do with ice puns and everything to do with faulty characterization.

This brings us to Poison Ivy...Sweet Lilith, what a botch of potential. Thurman's wonderfully campy and energetic performance and fun costume design has little value against such shockingly atrocious writing. Writing that sees an feminist icon mostly motivated by her lust for a man to kill innocents. Writing that put many on the false impression that DC's most prolific ecofeminist is a genocidal monster (an endgame for the character not once preceded in canon DC Comics previously, now treated as a defining staple of the character by non-fans) It's telling that nearly every solid take on the character post-1997 has been marked by just how opposed it is to Batman & Robin's dumbed down and frankly misogynistic take on her, shifting her from a complex anti-heroine driven by her desire to preserve life into a grotesque straw man.

Characters change and make big decisions here, but nothing is naturally developed. So many characters that should have had importance to this narrative feel like after-thoughts; predator Jason Woodrue being treated as a campy, queer coded mad scientist is the very definition of bad taste. I'm utterly convinced that Bruce's love interest Julie is only in the film because Schumacher & Goldsman were contractually obligated to include a love story, even one that goes absolutely nowhere where the love interest has a maximum of about 8 lines. The film has the pathos of a bad Mexican soap opera, which would be fine if it didn't get as pompous as it frequently does. It's all sound and fury and signifying nothing, Akiva Goldsman being the tale-telling idiot.

Rambo: Last Blood (2019)

A Relentlessly Dark, Tragic Sequel With A Couple Fumbles Here & There

[8/10 · 23 September 2019]

Not a masterpiece, but a surprisingly worthy sequel and one of the year's more underrated films. Extremely dark.

Even more depressing and bleak than the last sequel which is saying a lot since the last one had the bad guys gunning down unarmed children.

Stallone's performance is one of my favorites of the year and the actress playing Gabrielle does a surprisingly heartfelt and emotional job. I felt an almost protective instinct whenever she showed up on screen and you can easily see why Rambo would lose his mind trying to protect her.

Visual direction is pretty solid too. Rambo's world feels grimy but enormous, like he's a perpetual wanderer with no place in the world.

A lot of reviews have compared the violence to a grotesque slasher movie and they'd be right, but it honestly fits this film. It's not like the other sequels where Rambo is on a heroic quest to liberate the oppressed and brig justice; it's a tragedy of a destroyer past his prime lashing out in horrifying vengeance when his world comes crashing down.

The ending feels a bit forced and the film does get overly expository a lot in the first act (and a fair amount of the characters are definitely offensive stereotypes), but it's nowhere near the MAGA nightmare critics made it out to be. If anything, it seems pretty critical and damning of the jingoistic idea that a beefed up American dude with guns can go to another country and fix its corruption. Nobody is saved here by Rambo's actions, (in fact, several innocent people who he was trying to help suffer for them) nobody is redeemed, it's a crushingly hopeless film that's rarely fun but often gripping.

Outcast (I) (2014)

Sergio Leone Would Be Proud!

[10/10 · 15 September 2019]

Me in 2015: "Oh my God...I thought Drive Angry would be the last one, but we finally have it! A movie where Nick Cage's overacting actually has a purpose! HALLELUJAH!"

Outcast often garners comparison to similar East-Meets-West historical epics like The Last Samurai and The Great Wall, but it has much more in common with Western classics like Unforgiven and Sergio Leone's Dollars trilogy. Of course, I'm not saying it deserves that same level of classic status. No Western this decade not directed by Tarantino can say so. However, I would certainly argue that Outcast comes closest of the 2010s Westerns not in that special circle. It certainly comes closer than its noxious, overpraised contemporaries like True Grit or Hostiles.

The story could very easily be seen in structure and character archetypes similar to the works of Clint Eastwood and Clift Montgomery (Both if whom lead actor Hayden Christensen wonderfully embodies in steely stare hiding deep pain and regret as well as his lower, more brooding cadence) A troubled, haunted war veteran and social barbarian lives life as an inebriated drifter, until the daughter of a local government leader calls upon his help to deal with ex-veteran marauders. You could translate this entire script to the mid-1800s plains of Kansas, hardly change many many plot points and you'd have yourself an equally credible Western. More than credible. For a film shot under $10 million, the film is often quite visually striking. Many of the night shots are flat out majestic, feeling pulled off a particularly impressive and staying painting.

To compare it to The Last Samurai and Hostiles is also to miss the central message of the film and what makes it resonate with me far more; the idea that redemption is not possible for Western invaders and murderers in Eastern land. Jacob may have earned Lian's love, but he ends the film filled with no more purpose and no more aim and clarity than he did in the beginning. He the way he came, in rags riding a horse. One could say he's riding to a more peaceful place, but to do so would be to ignore Jacob's own words. "The world would be better off without us." he sorrowfully confesses to the villain Shing (Played with equal parts ferocity and true tragedy by Andy On.)

This is one of my favorite Nicolas Cage performances as well. As I indicated earlier, I was quite frustrated with how previous directors misused Cage's penchant exaggerated performances. They merely pushed for them for cheap entertainment, like a bear beaten into "dancing." Here, Cage's furious, delirious depiction of a perpetually drunk, drug addicted war vet kept alive on nothing but self hatred and an earned taste for destruction, works shockingly well. It's very reminiscent of Depp's Jack Sparrow, but with more pathos (Partially the result of a shorter script more focused on character) For me, it's right up there with his performances in the likes of Leaving Las Vegas or Mandy.

Given that I brought up Hostiles earlier, I only figured I should get more into why this film works and Hostiles doesn't. It won't take long, because it's very simple; Hostiles uses non-white people as props, Outcast uses them as characters. Lian is proactive, idealistic, pessimistic and cocky. Shing is conflicted, angsty, deceptive and self-pitying. I can't think of a single adjective as clear as these (or, frankly, any adjective at all) to describe the Native American "characters" in Hostiles. I can believe that Lian and Shing have their own stories where they're the hero, nowhere does Hostiles give its minorities any such respect.

I'm not going to say that most of the people who gave this film a bad review went into it wanting to hate it. That wouldn't be fair to say. But are the main voices we're listening too, the ones seen as most credible on various review sites, the ones who went in with such cynicism based solely on judgmental views of the 2 lead actors? Who held the film to unfair standards next to its contemporaries and had their criticisms made from first view of the trailer? Absolutely.

Outcast is one of the best and most underrated films of 2015, as well as being one of the most underrated of the decade. Go in with an open mind and a love for 60s Leone Westerns, and you may find this a real treat.

It Chapter Two (2019)

The Magic is Gone

[3/10 · 9 September 2019]

I want to make one thing perfectly clear before I get into why this film doesn't work at all. I loved It: Chapter One. You're gonna see a lot of pieces on Letterboxd over the course of this month go on about how the first film was never that good and that's just not something I'm going to buy into. As far as I'm concerned, the first film was a masterpiece and, in my opinion, the best film of 2017. I was so excited for the 2nd installment (I'm of the opinion that the 2nd half of the book is actually better than the first), that I opted to see it in IMAX instead of a regular theater (My first IMAX viewing since I was 5 years old) So when I tell you this is a really bad film, understand that I left that IMAX feeling like someone had died. I was the last person who wanted to be the bearer of bad news.

Not everything fails. This is, after all, a follow-up fona great film in my opinion. Almost all of the acting is quite excellent. Jessica Chastain as Beverly absolutely steals the show. You can tell she really studied the Hell out of this role as she captures a lot of the subtle facial acting choices of Lillis in this first movie. She's strong, she's fierce, she's funny, she's sympathetic. I have friends who are only interested in seeing this film for her performance and they likely won't be disappointing. Isaiah Mustafa is also fantastic as Mike Hanlon. Chapter Two gives Mike a lot more to do and definitely makes him into a more well developed and rounded character than the first film and Mustafah really helps to mold him into a rather mysterious, wise presence. James Ransone is practically a clone of an older Jack Dylan Grazer, in both appearance and vocal delivery. In fact, only one actor in the film seems to deliver a bad performance in my eyes, who we'll get to later.

The aesthetic is impressive as well. From the stunning and shocking practical effects used for the film's wide variety of monsters to the pleasing cinematography (IT Chapter Two's clever use of Dutch angles in particular really stuck with me) Muschieti (clearly a talented filmmaker, despite this film's failure) has a wonderful visual eye that's fully on display here.

Remember earlier when I said that only one actor gives a bad performance in this film? Unfortunately, that actor is the lead. James McAvoy, despite being a great actor, seems to completely phone it in as Bill Denbrough. His performance seems disinterested and devoid of passion. It's like he out so much into his earlier performance this year in Glass that he had nothing to give to his performance as Bill. It doesn't help that Chapter Two's characterization of Bill comes off as creepy and possessive ("Why can't you be the woman I want you to be?" he tells his own wife.)

It Chapter Two is possibly the worst edited film I've seen in theaters. That includes both Justice League and The Snowman. I'm not exaggerating an ounce when I say that nearly a third of the movie is just deleted scenes from the first film used as flashbacks. Almost every single one of these scenes don't exist in this cut of the movie for the purposes of character development or exploration of theme, but for more random spooky clown scenes. Not only are they unnecessary, not only are they lazy ways to make a rather small and unsubstantial film feel artificially epic, they're incredibly distracting and actually end of removing a lot of development from the adult cast. Ben's scene with Beverly in particular really rubbed me the wrong way. It's funny how Beverly's most in-character scene in Chapter Two is when she's actually Pennywise in disguise.

So much of the film seems aimless. It will set up certain aspects like a child in danger who reminds Bill of his late brother or an ancient Native American ritual of faith and friendship used to banish Pennywise and then go absolutely nowhere with them. Said child dies anticlimactically and the ritual that the film spent so much of its plodding, meaningless runtime ends up failing.

Ideas that the previous film set up are equally wasted. I was very curious to see where Beverly and Ben's romance would go in Chapter Two, one of my favorite love stories in literature. Sadly, it ends up having the passion of 2 sock puppets rubbing against each other. The attraction begins and ends at "Beverly loves poetry, Ben wrote a great poem, now they're gonna kiss." Maybe the film could have given their romance more depth and believability had it spent less time on unnecessary and pointless scare scenes, but that's neither here nor there.

Not only is It: Chapter Two a bad movie, it's a morally offensive one. The brutality and pointless nature of the film's beginning homophobic hate crime is horrible to witness. Fans of the book will argue it's merely being accurate to the source material, but with all of the pathos and humanity It Chapter Two removed from King's masterpiece, what made this one scene an absolute must to include? Don't even get me started on the film treating Eddie's suicide as a good thing because he was "the weakest of the group" and couldn't weigh down the Losers Club (I'm not even making that up, that's the exact terminology the film uses)

I never thought that a film could be released this year as disappointing and potential shattering than Pet Sematary, but It: Chapter Two takes the cake. An insult to its predecessor, an insult to the book and an insult to King as a storyteller.

Evil Dead (2013)

A Better 80s Horror Remake than 80s Horror Deserves

[10/10 · 8 August 2019]

There was a lot of hype leading up to Fede Alvarez's remake of Evil Dead. To say the least, I was not one of the ones buying it. I was firmly convinced there was no way that a darker take on the franchise could work, that Evil Dead without camp was like Fall without College Football. Rarely have I been so happy to be wrong. Evil Dead (2013) is not only one of the best remakes ever made, it's actually the best Evil Dead film to date, even topping the seemingly unsurpassable Evil Dead II. The film somehow captures Raimi's dirty, nasty and ruthless style even better than any of Raimi's Horror movies did, feeling mean spirited without ever being tasteless.

Evil Dead (2013) does what no Horror movie since The Blair Witch Project has pulled off; making me feel like a small child in an expansive, frightening world that still had some evil, black magic left in it. It's the kind of film that makes me fear the forest again, fear the unknown of the wild lying deep in the ominous backwoods near where I grew up. While The Blair Witch Project feels like watching home movies, Evil Dead (2013) feels like a twisted childhood fairy tale brought to violent and visceral life. Alvarez's visual style in everything from the dying, rotting woods to the delapidated and worn down cabin feels distinctly nostalgic in a way that hit me so much harder than I was expecting. I never thought that an Evil Dead film could hit me so personally, but this one absolutely did. It takes the hyperbolic fantasy of the Evil Dead franchise and turns it into something raw and real without ever losing personality and coming off dull, as so many dark reboots do. That's all without mentioning Alvarez's exceptional use of dolly shots, expanding the tracking shots that defined the original Evil Dead with some of the best uses of dolly zooms I've ever seen.

Jane Levy's performance as Mia is one of the best the Horror genre has seen this decade. While the female characters of previous Evil Dead films have felt underwritten at best and demeaning at worst, the characterization of Mia furiously rises from the sludge of its predecessors and figuratively beats them to death for being less intelligent than it. Her internalized horrors becoming something very literal, very external and very real, dragging all who surround her to a sadistic, nightmarish Hell, is spinechilling to witness. Levy makes Mia's increasingly belligerent and violent descent into madness something truly tragic and worth investing in. The gentle softness of her natural cadence juxtaposes brilliantly against the enraged ferocity of her vocal delivery ("I'm such an idiot." she seethes, in one of the most heartbreaking line deliveries of the decade, "For thinking that for once I could count on you!")Levy can very easily consider herself added to my list of Poison Ivy fan castings with her intense performance here.

Lou Taylor Pucci is one of the most underrated actors working today and it kills me that this is his only mainstream Hollywood Horror role as Eric. He's the only one here who really gives Levy a run for her money. Eric's increasing anxiety and fear of what he's done and what horrors he's responsible for, juxtaposed with his increasing introversion and aggression, is performed phenomenally through Pucci's cold stares and increasingly shaky delivery.

The writing is equally excellent. The way that this film captures fractured-but-strong family relationships; some broken, like between Mia's mother and her children, some in danger of breaking, like David and Mia. If The Wolfman (2010) nailed the dynamic of a family relationship inherently monstrous, Evil Dead (2013) nails the dynamic of family relationships that are made monstrous from something good, rather than doomed to spawn something vile from an aggressive and socially Darwinistic party. The film balances its inevitable tragedy with an unexpected level of triumph; David's rescue of his sister is a heartwarming and oddly humanistic decision reminiscent of the very best literary works of Stephen King. It's a truly rare narrative path for a modern tragic Horror film to date, giving it its very own unique throne in the pantheon of the decade's best Horror.

You'll notice that almost all cable screenings of Evil Dead (2013) refuse to go any direction but uncut. There is nothing but good reason for this. The rawness, the spectacle of its graphic and uncensored nature, (almost capturing the feel of found footage tonally at times) is something that was never meant to be contained. It's a ruthless and often cacklingly violent film, like a rabid predator shoved into a tiny cage. For perspective, this and Inner Demons (Which I greatly look forward to discussing) are the only films to make swearing genuinely scary since the aforementioned Blair Witch Project. Just as those films should never be censored, neither should this one be.

Evil Dead (2013) isn't just the best Evil Dead film to date, it's a better definitive 80s Horror remake than the very vast majority of 80s American Horror deserved. One of the biggest surprises in its outstanding execution in a decade all too full of them. Please, Mr. Alvarez, may I have some more?