MY CALL:  Not great. Kinda’ bad. Finally giving us some closure on the story.  Still entertaining to franchise fans.  MORE MOVIES LIKE Resident Evil:  Resident Evil (2002), Resident Evil: Apocalypse (2004), Resident Evil: Extinction (2007), Resident Evil: Afterlife (2010), Resident Evil: Retribution (2012), Doom (2005), the Silent Hill movies (2006, 2012) and the Underworld franchise (2003-2017) come to mind.  For a fine ratings vs earnings comparison of the Resident Evil and Underworld franchises check this feisty article out.

It seems that asking folks to list the Resident Evil movies in order of quality would be harder than getting an entire theater of fans to agree on pizza toppings—I’d say 1, 3, 5, 2, 6, 4.  This sixth franchise installment, as with each of its predecessors, manages to deliver a new take on presenting the Resident Evil world and the next step in an elaborately plot-holey but perfectly followable plot.  The movie opens right where Retribution (2012) left off—in the dilapidated remains of the White House.

Now with our fifth sequel, we have our fifth recap narration by Alice (Milla Jovovich; The Fifth Element, Resident Evil 1-6, Ultraviolet).  With each sequel offering a slightly different recap, some adding more to backstory than others, The Final Chapter offers the richest and most informative origin inklings about the Red Queen and Dr. Isaacs’ (Iain Glen; Game of Thrones, Darkness, Resident Evil: Apocalypse) involvement in the T-Virus outbreak.

Apparently, over the course of the first five movies, the human population has been reduced to about 4000 and in another 48 hours it will be zero.  Now that Wesker (Shawn Roberts; Resident Evil 4-6, xXx: The Return of Xander Cage)—who apparently was lying to Alice in Retribution (2012) and was really evil the whole time—is back in control at Umbrella, the Red Queen is a bit nervous about how things are being run and has recruited Alice’s help to now save mankind.  It turns out there has been an airborne antivirus back in Racoon City this whole time and now the Red Queen wants to be friends.  Welcome to “the upside down” world!

During her trip back to The Hive, Alice tours a world that now resembles The Walking Dead, complete with ambush jerks, booby traps and Dr. Isaacs prattling about the meek inheriting the world while running a mobile tank cult.  This leads to a long tank fight action sequence (which is okay) and then a tank chase scene (which featured too many videogame special effects for me to enjoy).

Alice joins forces with a friendly group of survivors including Claire (Ali Larter; House on Haunted Hill, Final Destination 1-2, Resident Evil 3-4), Doc (Eoin Macken; The Forest, Centurion) and Abigail (Ruby Rose; John Wick 2, xXx: The Return of Xander Cage).  Of all six movies, these allies seem to matter the least in this one.  Too bad.  So, I’ll just stop discussing them now even though they’re in most of the movie.

My favorite action sequence was the giant flying monster attack (early in the movie), which may have included some stop-motion effects.  But most of the action was squandered.  We have a horde of zombies that doesn’t matter much when it should matter most, largely because they were dispatched way too easily to take seriously by waves of videogame graphic explosions.  The battle with the horde could have been awesome, but the scale and urgency just wasn’t there.

Another problem, much as was the case in Retribution (2012), was that great fight choreography + lousy action photography and fast-cut choppy editing = crappy action.

From my Retribution review: “Minus a few story-building scenes, this movie essentially boils down to a continuous 90-minute action sequence.  This probably sounds amazing, right?  It wasn’t.  All the action felt a lot like “background action” in an otherwise great action movie.  You know?  Like when Optimus Prime was fighting Megatron, there were soldiers and other Autobots fighting Decepticons in the background (and it looked good), but nothing particularly cool would happen with the background fighters while the camera was focusing on the two heavy hitters, the main attraction.  In Retribution [and Final Chapter], this action is never punctuated by awesome moments; there are no highlights or climaxes… Hand-to-hand, weapons, guns, and a lot of clever choreography…it was all entertaining. Very entertaining.  But I kept waiting for the “Wow.”  It never came.”

When will directors learn?  I guess as long as these films keep making money, Paul W. S. Anderson (Resident Evil 1 & 4-6, Mortal Kombat, Event Horizon, Soldier) won’t need to change his style.  And here I am being part of the problem—I bought this movie.  But you know what?  I don’t regret it.  These movies are heavily flawed, but remain entertaining.  Even the “Agent Smith” Matrix fight (late in the movie) was somewhat entertaining, even if I thought it was equally dumb.

Perhaps this is just because our director’s wife (yes, Paul and Milla are married) is 41 years old in this film, but is this the first time he let her be “fully clothed” LOL?  And by that, I mean not dressing her up like a post-apocalyptic hooker, vinyl suited dominatrix, or spandexed ninja?  You’ll also notice that Alice shockingly shows us no leg or side-boob action in some skimpy surgical gown nor does she float naked in a clone chamber.  Now that their kids are almost old enough to see these films, I guess good taste prevailed.

While the “save the day” premise was easily the most mind-numbingly inane of the series (i.e., one vial of airborne antivirus will save the rest of the world if it is released by the final second of a 48-hour countdown, and this vial was just sitting there for 6 movies), this movie’s 3^rd Act was very redeeming in terms of franchise story-arc resolution.  We even learn something surprisingly cool about Alice, the Red Queen, the clones, and the initial outbreak.

The Final Chapter doesn’t necessarily close the door on the franchise, but the combination of Milla’s age and the title seem to indicate otherwise.  Some may be relieved, other bereft.  After all, we’ve enjoyed 15 years (2002-2016) of Alice’s zombie-slaying shenanigans. And as much as I enjoy complaining about these movies, I remain a fan, too.

MY CALL:  This largely serves to continue the story and madness of Phantasm (1979).  If you enjoyed part 1, you’ll enjoy this.  If not, you won’t.  MORE MOVIES LIKE Phantasm II:  There is little out there that compares to this film, so I’ll just suggest starting with Phantasm (1979) and perhaps the subsequent sequels up to part 5.

So here we are 8 years after the events of Phantasm (1979) with writer/director Don Coscarelli (Phantasm 1-4, The Beastmaster, Bubba Ho-Tep).  A psychic girl (Paula Irvine; Phantasm III), Liz, has been keeping tabs on the Tall Man with her premonitions, Michael (James Le Gros) has just been released from a long stay in a psychiatric facility, and Reggie (Reggie Bannister; Phantasm 1-5, Wishmaster) somehow doesn’t remember that anything from part 1 even happened.  Reggie and the psychiatrists say it was all just a dream Michael manifested to cope with the loss of his brother.

After Michael has a premonition that Reggie’s second house would explode (one in 1979, one now), now with his wife and child within, as a result of the Tall Man (Angus Scrimm; Phantasm 1-5, Subspecies, Wishmaster) and his army of ugly evil dwarves…well, Reggie just decides to believe Michael that evil is behind it and they set out searching the country for the Tall Man using Michael’s newfound powers of dream clairvoyance.

PSYCHIC-AMNESIAC SEQUEL SIDEBAR: Okay, this gets a bit confusing.  Completely different from Phantasm (1979), amnesia and psychic powers are prominent themes in this sequel.  There is no explanation for Reggie’s amnesia regarding the events of part 1, yet once he decides to believe Michael’s story, he behaves as if he always knew everything about the Tall Man, his evil dwarves, his extra-dimensional nature, and his vile plans for our dead.  Likewise, Michael’s powers just seem to “be there” as if they were always there.  As they are presented to us, these things are treated as if they have been constants.  Moreover, we now have psychic Liz and the Tall Man using telepathy.  Just go with it.

There are some great shots of country sides—a nice and unexpected touch in an 80s horror film.  During their trek they prepare, making a four-barrel shotgun and flamethrower, and follow the dilapidated remains of ghost towns and mass exhumed graveyards in the wake of the Tall Man’s murderous influence as he builds his army of the dead.

Their journey finds many strange things, among them a woman with an awesomely gory slimy monstrous parasite delivering the Tall Man’s messages, disappearing dead naked women in the morgue, a cute hitchhiker named Alchemy (Samantha Phillips; Dollman), a chainsaw fight with a low blow, a funny sex scene and, of course, the return of the blood-lusted spheres—i.e., the floating metal balls from part 1 which now have some mechanized upgrades. You can’t discuss these movies without mentioning the balls.  The effects were great, with the murderous chrome spheres flying throw the air (excellent and seamless rotoscoping, by the way), unsheathing blades and drills and buzz saws, impaling victims, and drilling into their heads!  The gore is sufficient as blood gushes in bright red and mustard yellow.

Overall the gore is very satisfying.  One of the ball scenes is among my favorites… when the ball enters a man’s back, bores through his torso and up his throat, and out his mouth.  The finale also has a melty, gooey flair to it.

Boasting a lot more dialogue, the Tall Man is somewhat hammed up in this sequel. But this is not a bad thing at all. It’s a tad cheesy, but a lot of fun. Even more fun are the evil dwarves, which are far more numerous than part 1. We also see more about their creation and their other dimension as we pass through the gateway to another world again.  We don’t really learn anything more than we knew in part 1, though.  The Tall Man is transforming dead people into his growling hooded dwarf servants and there is a portal to another dimension, to which he apparently outsources this labor force…to do…something.  Maybe part 3 will have some answers.

Like part 1, the surprise ending is totally random, makes no sense at all, and hinders the series’ ability to continue to a part 3.  But, also like part 1, it seems more concerned with being looney than credible.  Perhaps it was all just a dream.

WHERE IS THIS ALL GOING SIDEBAR:  These somewhat sci-fi concepts from Phantasm (1979) are introducing us to a greater theme that is only partially realized in part 1, and unfortunately no more so in part 2.  As if world-building, you’d think Coscarelli is setting the stage for something of grander scale by letting us know that these things exist, without getting into the why’s.  In part 1, Michael visits a creepy fortune-teller and her telepathically linked granddaughter who subject him to a Dune-like “fear box” test.  But why?  Why are there truly supernatural diviners and why do they “prepare” young Michael for his future challenges (i.e., the Tall Man)?  Why does the Tall Man turn into a young woman, in a lavender dress in part 1 and the form of the cute hitchhiker in part 2, and why not someone else?
There’s a lot going on here.  The Tall Man is reanimating human corpses as evil compact dwarves so that their now denser bodies can handle the greater gravity of another planet, in which the dwarves serve as slaves.  We don’t know why, or to do what, or exactly where or for whom.  This is all somehow revealed to Michael (through a telepathic link perhaps) when he momentarily passes the portal and witnesses the harsh world on the other side in part 1.  Is it Hell, or another planet in a nearby solar system?  Did this permanently give him the psychic powers that we find now in part 2?  Are there other portals?  Is the Tall Man the head bad guy, or the equivalent of a Vegas pit boss or regional salesman/recruiter?  Who knows?  After watching parts 1 and 2, we sure don’t!  As far as ambitious stories go, Phantasm 1-2 are like the horror Avatar (2009) of the 1970s.  Unfortunately, after setting the stage we don’t seem to take it anywhere new in part 2.  And yet again, Coscarelli uses a rather A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) style ending that could only confuse us more.

What makes this movie work is how satisfyingly unusual the story is.  It’s weird and doesn’t make much sense.  That said, I remain quite impressed with this original product.  This film may not feel organized, but it still has a lot of good to offer the genre and its story stands out even today.

MY CALL:  Somehow yet more incomprehensible than its predecessors, this is the first in the series I wouldn’t recommend outside of seeing the whole series in order.  Just imagine everything you liked form parts 1-2, and now imagine that there’s less of it.  MORE MOVIES LIKE Phantasm III: Lord of the Dead:  There is little out there that compares to these films, so I’ll just suggest starting with Phantasm (1979) and Phantasm II (1988)—both of which are far better—and perhaps the subsequent sequels up to part 5.

HOW DID WE GET HERE? This franchise is just plain bonkers, and the story is all over the place with no real explanations in sight.  Parts 1 and 2 ended in inexplicable nightmare-like twists a la A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984), leaving us at the end of part 2 with Reggie (Reggie Bannister; Phantasm 1-5, Wishmaster) apparently dead at the side of the road, and Mike (A. Michael Baldwin; Phantasm 1-5) and Liz (Paula Irvine; Phantasm III) being driven to their doom by the Tall Man (Angus Scrimm; Phantasm 1-5, Subspecies, Wishmaster), who had “melted to death” not long before.  Our part 3 opening reveals (ever so vaguely) how, indeed, the thought-to-be-dead Tall Man got to them in the end.  Then an evil dwarf eats Liz’ face, taking care of someone who apparently isn’t needed to further to plot in this next sequel.

After the car crash (with Mike, Liz and the Tall Man at the end of part 2), Reggie checks on Mike at the hospital to find an evil-sphere-possessed nurse trying to kill him!  The magical orb literally took the place of her brain, thus evolving the capabilities of these entities in the franchise.  That’s certainly new! So why not do that all the time and just assassinate the protagonists?  Mike ends up dying and, contrary to his from-the-dead brother Jody’s (Bill Thornbury; Phantasm 1-5) advice, he goes into the light.  But why would he do that? The ghost of his brother was right there telling him to do otherwise!  Parts 1-2 were admittedly weird, and a lot went unexplained.  Be prepared to be baffled.

Much to my dismay, this sequel adopts a 90s “bad movie” vibe (a la Leprechaun), complete with douchebag criminal bad guys and a tough little survivor kid with a razorblade frisbee.  Now in the form of a metal sphere, Jody’s spirit guides Reggie and the kid to the Tall Man.  I know, you’re thinking I must’ve left something out because this makes no sense for Jody to have been a ghost and then a killer sphere. Bad news. I’ve told you everything. This just doesn’t make sense.

On their journey, they join forces with the nunchuck-twirling Rocky (Gloria Lynne Henry; The Devil’s Advocate, Phantasm: Ravager), Reggie somehow becomes a sleaze ball, and another silly sex scene transpires—I’m beginning to think this is a running joke between Reggie and Coscarelli.

Speaking of jokes, this sequel is doing very little service or justice to the franchise in that it is just incomprehensibly silly.  People are doing things in dreams that affect reality, the Tall Man’s severed body parts continue to become ridiculous monsters (as in part 1) for no reason, Jody keeps switching from being a sphere to a specter to a dream to a sphere, portals just seem to appear and disappear as needed, and…oh, right, the really stupid douchebag criminal zombie fights comprise much of the action. It’s become pretty campy.

Just having a chat with my brother Jody…who’s a ball now.

Despite all this silliness, we do get some answers.  We develop the Phantasm mythology by explaining how the Tall Man seems to continue returning from the dead, Mike’s strange connection to the Tall Man is elaborated, what powers the murderous spheres is revealed, some of the things done to create his evil dwarves are shown, and some additional aspects of the Tall Man’s grand plan are exposed.  We don’t really understand the ins and outs of any of this, but at least we know more.  And, despite all that isn’t answered, it felt good to learn more about what’s going on with this interdimensional graverobbing scheme to…take over the world?  Or at least, the Pacific Northwest?

Writer/director Don Coscarelli (Phantasm 1-4, The Beastmaster, Bubba Ho-Tep) continues to make sequels that hardly tie together, yet always manage to pick up right where the former ends.  Evidently, some duct tape and rewrites go a long way.  This is both admirable and a tad crazy, especially given the gaps between these movies (1979, 1988, 1994) and how he maintains the same lead cast.  Much to the film’s detriment, the Tall Man seems less menacing and less impressive here, as do his dwarves and balls.  Again, we have violently swerved into bad movie territory, so the suspense has been largely replaced by giggles as if to ask is this really serious right now?  You also may recall that psychic powers were prominent in Phantasm II (1988), and that Mike had a connection of sorts to the Tall Man. Now Jody shares other-worldly links to both Mike and the Tall Man. So, while this isn’t actually new, it’s already starting to feel old.

You can’t discuss these movies without mentioning the balls.  The effects were pretty solid, with the murderous chrome spheres flying through the air, unsheathing blades and buzz saws, impaling victims, and drilling into their heads!  The gore is decent, but more toned down from parts 1-2 (which were served better by their budgets). The balls appear markedly “more CGI” than before, when they were definitely rotoscoped in parts 1-2.  The gore overall was less satisfying than previous installments, along with most aspects of this sequel.

Of course, every movie has its trademark ball-spewing-blood scene.

Parts 1-2 worked because of the satisfyingly unusual story.  That’s gone.  The series also thrived on the relevance of the Tall Man.  That’s diminished.  It now relies on its mythology which, despite building somewhat, isn’t satisfying enough to save this movie.  It’s the first in the series I wouldn’t recommend outside of seeing the whole series in order.  Like parts 1-2, the surprise ending is pretty random and feels like Reggie, Mike and the kid are doomed.  I’m curious to see where this goes in part 4.

MY CALL:  At first, this film feels like a typical bad 90s movie.  It’s not.  Give it a chance and franchise fans will be pleased by the revelations within even though the effects were largely lacking.  MORE MOVIES LIKE Phantasm IV: Oblivion:  There is little out there that compares to these films, so I’ll just suggest starting with Phantasm (1979) and Phantasm II (1988)—both of which are far better—and only then perhaps should one venture the subsequent sequels up to part 5. Phantasm III: Lord of the Dead (1994) paled in comparison to parts 1-2, swerving away from original ’80s goodness right into ’90s bad movie-ville.

Where we left our ill-fated Reggie at the end of Phantasm III: Lord of the Dead (1994).

Writer/director Don Coscarelli (Phantasm 1-4, The Beastmaster, Bubba Ho-Tep) returns with his fourth (and his final directorial) installment to explore the mysteries of the dimensional fork.  As Phantasm III: Lord of the Dead (1994) came to a close, Mike (A. Michael Baldwin; Phantasm 1-5) had fled the northwest and Reggie (Reggie Bannister; Phantasm 1-5, Wishmaster) was doomed.  Yet now we find that the Tall Man (Angus Scrimm; Phantasm 1-5, Subspecies, Wishmaster) mysteriously chose to spare him as it was “not yet his time.”  Meanwhile, Mike is having visions of evil dwarves during his cross-country Hearse tour, passing ghost town after ghost town, harvested of all life by the Tall Man over the last 20 years.

After the enigmatic and original foundation laid down by parts 1-2, Lord of the Dead (1994) really took a turn for the worse as a typical 90s “bad movie” and Oblivion seems to start out pushing that “bad 90s” envelope hard.  So much random crap happens that makes no sense.  And, no, I don’t mean it makes no sense now until they explain it later. No, no, no…this just feels like a bunch of random stupid scenes strung together.  Sure, it’s clear that there are some really cool ideas behind them (let’s stress the really cool)—and I’d love to hear Coscarelli explain it over a few pints.  But they seem wholly ill-explored, unexplained and prematurely forced on screen.  We need a Netflix series to re-approach the Phantasm film story arc!

Amid all this, Mike’s ghost/sphere brother Jody (Bill Thornbury; Phantasm 1-5) warns Reggie that Mike needs his help (and then we don’t see him again for half the movie), Reggie encounters a skinless demon state trooper who pukes yellow blood into his mouth (and we never find out why or what it was), Mike taunts the Tall Man with suicide only to not die because (like Reggie) it wasn’t his time (but the ends don’t justify the means…even though this “sort of” makes sense later), and then a portal just appears at Mike’s convenience to escape the Tall Man who seems content to not even try to stop or follow him.  Come on!  This stuff is inexplicable even for a Phantasm movie!  There’s even a scene featuring evil sphere BOOBS (Heidi Marnhout; Bubba Ho-Tep, Flight of the Living Dead)!  Do you think we get any explanation for how that happened?  Of course not. But, it was actually a pretty cool scene.

So now Mike is traveling through time to his own past in the 1970s (i.e., the Phantasm part 1 timeline), and even prior to that when we find a completely sane “Jebediah” Tall Man offering up fresh lemonade and southern hospitality.  This probably isn’t making too much sense yet, and it’s not you…it’s Coscarelli.  But, believe it or not (and much to my surprise), eventually some of this is actually going to congeal into a somewhat sensible storyline.  Not all of it, but the important bullet points.  However, one that they never clarify is how Lord of the Dead revealed that Mike himself actually is an evil metal sphere puppet of sorts.

As if the largely haphazardly disjointed (yet later somewhat comprehensible in hindsight) plot wasn’t problematic enough, I find great fault with the special effects in this movie.  Sure, the “sphere boobs” scene was actually really cool. But most of the movie relies on a few spurts of bright yellow blood and ugly dwarf make-up.  And we don’t have nearly enough flying sphere action!  Fine for a random direct-to-DVD 90s horror film, but not a worthy follow-up of the demonic back parasite or melting death or hair-pull reveal or sphere-in-the-mouth death of Phantasm II (1988; $3 million budget).  Even Lord of the Dead (1994; $2.5 million budget) had better effects than IV, but not II.  But Oblivion had a mere $650K budget, hardly more than double the $300K of Phantasm’s (1979) in the 70s!

It hardly seems fair to compare the best effect of part IV (ABOVE) to the highlights of part II (BELOW).

It’s funny, I spent an hour watching this thinking it was mind-numbing garbage, but a lot of things really did come together.  So…this isn’t garbage at all.  Were there stupid 90s-esque rando-scenes?  Yes, several, and they had no business being here.  But this sequel accomplished something that no other Phantasm film yet had—it actually answered as many questions as it created whereas parts 1-2 answered almost nothing while only raising hoards of questions.

This “apparently bad movie” turns out, when truly watched all the way through to the end, to rather, in fact, be the most comprehensible of the franchise so far.

MY CALL:  This is an outstanding, bloody flick; just a great bad movie for horror lovers! It starts in uber-raunchy porn-script mode, but it finds its deliciously gory footing in due time and is well worth the wait.  MORE MOVIES LIKE Wrong Turn 4: Bloody Beginnings:  Well, of course, you need to go back to Wrong Turn (2003; the best one), maybe Wrong Turn 2: Dead End (2007; more silly but fun), but probably skip Wrong Turn 3: Left for Dead (2009).  More to try include The Hills Have Eyes 1-2 (1977, 1984, 2006, 2007), Just Before Dawn (1981), The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 (1986) will all continue to satisfy the hillbilly horror subgenre, and then maybe Cabin Fever 1-3 (2002-2014) for the gore hounds.

Director Declan O’Brien (Cyclops, Sharktopus, Wrong Turn 3-5) returns for his second Wrong Turn sequel to reveal the origins of our favorite inbred hillbilly cannibals.  Everything started with Three Finger (Sean Skene; Channel Zero), One Eye (Tristan Carlucci; Channel Zero) and Sawtooth (Scott Johnson), whom we first met in Wrong Turn (2003) but now meet as kids in 1974.  Incarcerated residents of a Greenbriar, West Virginia sanitarium, these boys were born with advanced congenital analgesia, resulting in their inability to feel pain.  I guess that actually makes some sense of their superhuman behavior in these movies…and maybe Michael Myers as well.

Fast-forward to 2003.  Heading out for a winter retreat to a family cabin, nine college students take a wrong turn and snowmobile out of cell reception to the now abandoned mental hospital in the snowy mountains.  Oh, and of course, a blizzard abounds to maroon them in flesh-eating Deliverance.

Right off the bat, we know this is a “bad movie” for sure.  It might turn out to be a lot of fun, but it’s bad.  Meet our co-eds: Kenia (Jennifer Pudavick; Faces in the Crowd, Wishmaster 3-4), Sara (Tenika Davis; Saw VI), Bridget (Kaitlyn Leeb; Total Recall, Wolves, Bitten), Jenna (Terra Vnesa; 5ive Girls, Goosebumps), Lauren (Ali Tataryn; Curse of Chucky, Silent Night), Claire (Samantha Kendrick; The Exorcism of Molly Hartley), Kyle (Victor Zinck, Jr.; Grave Encounters 2), Vincent (Sean Skene; Channel Zero) and Daniel (Dean Armstrong; Heroes Reborn, Saw 3D, Joy Ride 3).  Of, course, they’re all good-looking like they were plucked from a J Crew catalog. As we get to know them, their dialogue is atrocious.  These twenty-somethings talk like they’re reading porn screenplays…and even act like it.  There’s a lot of nudity and some rather graphic sex scenes.

From the opening sequence I knew this would be better than Left for Dead (2009) and at least as fun as Dead End (2007; which was trashy but playfully gory).  The scenes exude a sophomoric atmosphere, as if Axe Body Spray produced this raunchy film that spot-lights its tropes with a “let’s explore” here to “great, we’re out of weed” there and throw in a “sex scene on an old mental hospital bed.”  The guys try to joke their way into partner swaps and threesomes until the body count starts to accumulate.

The gore is abundant and, despite a moderately low budget, quite entertaining.  The dismemberment in the opening sequence was a feisty little number, the delightfully gory barbed wire noose scene offers a solid mix of fun and tension, and then there was the butchering scene… yikes!  Our mutant rednecks engage in some skin-peeling torture, just slowly flaying and yanking his skin off while the dude was still alive.  It was legitimately tough to watch, but ooooooh did I adore it!  This was graphic, brutal, visceral…even a bit giggly—a solid cruelly playful nod to The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 (1986). Definitely in contention for best death scene of the franchise along with the epic Kelly Clarkson death scene in Dead End (2007), that poor guy from Left for Dead (2009) and Emmanuelle Chriqui’s death in Wrong Turn (2003).

Here are the best Wrong Turn kills (top to bottom) of 2003, 2007 and 2009…

The quality of the kills is high for the hillbilly horror subgenre.  The writing might be terrible, yet this sequel manages to do the franchise honor!  You’ll feel more fun than fear, but you’ll wince and reel about as often as you gasp with a smile.  I thought Declan O’Brien did a piss poor job with Left for Dead (2009), but he might have learned from some of his mistakes.  I’m putting this right up there with the original Wrong Turn (2003) in raw entertainment value.  It’s clearly a sillier approach, but it’s up there.  And even if you consider Wrong Turn (2003) a “bad movie,” this is a “badder movie.”  But it’s a really good “badder movie.”  LOL.  Enjoy.

MY CALL:  This is the only film in the series I didn’t like at all. Completely uninspired, yet still boasting our favorite characters reunited yet again and some nice ideas that find only the poorest execution.  MORE MOVIES LIKE Phantasm V: Ravager:  There is little out there that compares to these films, so I’ll just suggest starting with Phantasm (1979) and Phantasm II (1988)—both of which are far better—and only then perhaps should one venture the subsequent sequels Phantasm III: Lord of the Dead (1994), which paled in comparison to parts 1-2, and Phantasm IV: Oblivion (1998), which finally started to offer us some answers to the mysteries behind the Tall Man.

With a filmography almost entirely composed of animated children’s series, director David Hartman (Transformers Prime, My Friends Tigger & Pooh, Jackie Chan Adventures, Astro Boy) is a rather “interesting” choice to follow up the four previous Phantasm films from the mind of writer/director Don Coscarelli (Phantasm 1-4, The Beastmaster, Bubba Ho-Tep).  About now you might be hypothesizing about what talents or perspective he might bring to the table.  I’ll save you the trouble… the answer is none at all.

Phantasm IV: Oblivion (1998) revealed something of a time travel loop, resulting in Mike (A. Michael Baldwin; Phantasm 1-5) being left presumably for dead now that the sphere (with his brain probably inside according to Lord of the Dead) was removed by the Tall Man (Angus Scrimm; Phantasm 1-5, Subspecies, Wishmaster).  Now in Ravager, Reggie (Reggie Bannister; Phantasm 1-5, Wishmaster) has been searching the American wastelands for nearly two decades in search of Mike and the Tall Man.

Toying with the notions of time travel, dreams and alternate dimensions, we switch back and forth between a “possible” future and present (maybe two presents).  In one of these times/dimensions, Reggie is older and senile.  He tries to explain the whole Phantasm story to Mike, who visits him and explains that he was found wandering the desert like Moses with dementia.  In another, he’s joining freedom fighters against the Tall Man, his dwarves and his now giant balls in a post-apocalyptic war zone.

We cover some familiar plot points of parts 2-4—most notably when Reggie picks up a cute hitchhiker (Dawn Cody) much younger than him and tries to sleep with her.  Also, like parts 3-4, there are some rather zany scenes, among them is a neat visit from the Lady in Lavender (Kathy Lester; Phantasm 1 & 3) and a curious sighting of a giant silver sphere.

So now we find ourselves almost 20 years after Oblivion (1998) and despite all technological advancements these evil CGI balls just don’t measure up to the metal spheres of the early films.  Don’t even get me started on the just plain stupid death scenes—all from lame ball impalements and lame ball blood spews that don’t look as good as parts 1-3… or boring gunplay.  Moreover, this is easily the worst written and least inspired installment of the series.  The camera shots are lame and basic, and the “television movie” atmosphere is akin to an R-rated movie on the Hallmark or Lifetime Network.

But let’s appreciate the “good” here.  While, I must sadly admit this is the only Phantasm movie I didn’t enjoy, there were some cool attempts at meshing the same characters across different dimensions along a linear timeline.  I felt that it didn’t work, but the thought was there.  My understanding (from gleaning the IMDB trivia page) is that portions of this were originally a web-series picking up the story after Oblivion (1998), and then they decided to film more content and string it together as a film.  This was simultaneously a great and terrible idea.  Great in continuing to develop the story, terrible in having such a low budget that nothing looked good.

Overall, this was not good.  I found it quite disappointing even as a major fan of the franchise.  The best thing about this film was the ongoing reunion of A. Michael Baldwin, Angus Scrimm, Bill Thornbury and Reggie Bannister from 1979 to 2016.

MY CALL:  Heartfelt horror with endearing characters whose warmth transcends the genre, Burn is the gem you’ve been looking for, made by the people who need to be making more films, and safely steering us clear of exhausting tropes.

MORE Indie Reviews:  Here at MFF we occasionally do horror short film and pre-release indie film reviews on request. Among recent solicited promotions are Order of the Ram (2013; short film), Love in the Time of Monsters (2014; feature length), Interior (2014; feature length), Smothered (2014; feature length), In the Dark (2015; feature length), Trailer Talk: The Void, TRAILER TALK: Blood Money, Short Film Buzz: Burn (2016; press release), Brother (2016; short film), the indie techno-horror Other Halves (2016; feature length), Short Film Buzz: Kickstarter Campaign for Scythe (2016; press release), Scythe (2016; short film), Shallow Waters (2017; short film) and Tethered (2017; short film).

Disclaimer: This review was solicited by the filmmakers (Slaughtered Bird Creations and Dragon Egg Media) and/or producers who provided privileged access to the film. However, my opinion remains unbiased as I was neither hired nor paid to produce this critical review, nor do I have an investment stake in the film.

Burn (@BurnShortFilm), a short psychological horror film made in Hertfordshire and north London, UK: “After several local disappearances prompt a nationwide manhunt, Burn focusses on Peter and Louise – two of many gripped by media-induced fear. When their son, Charlie, is born, Louise must find a way of raising him amid continuing public hysteria and incomprehensible personal tragedy.”

Short films come in all manner of quality and style and, if you review them, you’ve come to learn this the hard way—like desperately sifting river sand in your pan, hoping against hope for that glimmering speck of gold.  So, imagine my relief when I found Burn boasting the skilled camera work and shots of a more learned eye.  The production value is high (until the end when we could feel the budget limitations) and most scenes are crisply executed.  From artistic visuals to simply filming perfunctory tasks, the emotionally powerful first five minutes of this film feel like a montage of technically pleasing filmmaking.  Kudos to director Judson Vaughan and his cinematographer!

I felt particularly edgy watching the “old gritty family tapes” opening sequence.  Between the new trailer for It (2017) and films like Sinister (2012), I’ve come to fear they are signs of bad things to come for the characters in our favorite genre.  However, I’d have liked to see this element more explored in the film.

Kindly playing a father whom his son will never know, Max Cavenham brings a candid compassion to the screen.  His performance, complemented by solid editing work, breathes humanity into this role—and a challenge it certainly is to truly relate to short film characters in such short time.  Playing his wife, Emma Kelly likewise provisions a sincere, lived-in character.  They are real people who say credible things rather than slasher fodder festooned with clichés. Their moments together feel very real, as if you might have warmly shared them with someone in your own life just yesterday.  Again, paramount filmmaking from everyone involved in this.

Not flawless, the second act (i.e., minutes 4 to 9) plods along, feeling like the product of different filmmakers and writers who had to force the plot’s hand a bit.  But, again, with such a short running time this is perhaps simply indicative of the reality that we need some exposition and staging to drive us to the climactic revelation… and that revelation, our third act, found me quite satisfied.  At first it felt quite familiar and a tad campy (which may garner negative criticism from some due to the drastic shift in tone), but then I formed a vast Cheshire smile at the “real” reveal.  Interestingly, it inspired a twisted sort of heartfelt relief…while also murderous! LOL

A patient film highlighting the skills of the entire team on and behind the screen, Burn’s story is the brainchild of www.TheSlaughteredBird.com co-owner, Chris Barnes (@TheBlueTook), and in partnership with Vaughan’s Dragon Egg Media label it was released under production umbrella Slaughtered Bird Films (@SlaughteredBird).  So, I’d like to say thank you to Barnes and Vaughan.  We need more thoughtful horror like this, and more considered characters like these.

If there is a take home message here, the thing I’ll remember most about this film, it actually won’t be the sort of double-twist zinger (which I quite enjoyed).  Nope.  For me it will be Charlie’s endearing father, nervously and meticulously preparing videos for his unborn son with such tender care.  In those show-stealing moments Max Cavenham was brilliant!  So much more than just “great scenes [that happen to be] in a horror movie,” the heart of those opening scenes transcends the genre and would shine in any film of any genre.  Imagine that, real filmmakers making horror.

Thanks to everyone involved and for sharing and asking me to review this.  You likely felt you were asking a favor of me, yet I feel I’m the one who owes you something.

MY CALL:  A brutal horror film driven more by characters than gory backseat shock tactics.  But make no mistake, the brutal gore is there, too.  MORE MOVIES LIKE The Belko Experiment:  Some reviewers have compared this to the likes of Would You Rather (2012), Cheap Thrills (2013), 13 Sins (2014) or Battle Royale (2000).  Sure, there are similarities, but I largely disagree.  Fans of Belko should instead turn to the mania-driven films The Mist (2007) or The Experiment (2010).

Disclaimer: This blu-ray was sent to me by a publicist from FOX along with some free Belko paraphernalia gifts in hopes that I would review the movie—probably to rally interest for the DVD release.  However, I was not paid to write this nor were there any conditions to my receiving this package.

Clearly demonstrative of the low corporate overhead of running an overseas business, opening shots of Bogota, Colombia’s city streets introduce us to some of our office drones much in the same fashion as did Office Space (1999). Our displaced Americans work for a non-profit company specializing in—again, ironically to the tune of Office Space—facilitating the hiring of American personnel to overseas businesses; an outsourced company specializing in facilitating outsourcing personnel.

Now I’m not sure if it’s my age or the fact that I love The Replacements (2000) that I even noticed this, but the irony continues to rain down thick as our Belko employees stroll into work and the scene is scored by a Spanish language rendition of “I Will Survive.”  LOL.  Way to set the mood as our smiling office workers arrive to their daily grind.  But quite contrary to the drab cubicle Hell of Office Space, Belko boasts a gorgeously manicured corporate-chic environment, rich with all the corporate perk trim.

The work day begins with some banterous levity from Mike (John Gallagher Jr.; Hush, 10 Cloverfield Lane), evading overzealous oversharer’s family vacation photo assaults, pleasant office friends naming their ant farm ants, a bit of flirting, and playful relationship gossip.  Among the staff we find the boss Barry (Tony Goldwyn; Ghost, The Last House on the Left), Leandra (Adria Arjona; True Detective, Pacific Rim: Uprising), Bud (Michael Rooker; The Walking Dead, Slither), the pot-smoking rationalist Marty (Sean Gunn; Guardians of the Galaxy Vols. 1-2, Tromeo and Juliet), and Office Space’s own Wendell (John C. McGinley; Stan Against Evil, Identity).  Everyone seems happy to be there and the tone of the film is expertly cast before pulling the carpet out from under us.

But the fun and games come to an end when the building seals everyone inside of a steel trap and an announcement prompts that if two people are not dead in 30 minutes, there will be “repercussions.”  Some remain of rational mind and humane heart, others not so much.  As things get dire, morals tend to degenerate, don’t they?  Just as we saw in The Mist (2007).  Like a murderously flowered spring meadow on a windy day, undesirable personality traits pollinate mass hysteria.

Most of the effects are well-executed, abruptly brutal blood splatters.  But we also enjoy a fair share of skull-crushing, face-collapsing scenes.  You know, some awesomely “Chainsaw Massacre slaughterhouse” chunky gore.  The gore is visceral, and the atmosphere makes us feel it unrelentingly harder.

Director Greg McLean (Rogue, Wolf Creek 1-2, The Darkness) and writer James Gunn (Slither, Guardians of the Galaxy Vols. 1-2) kindly paved our character introductions with a sort of daily humanity.  After all, we don’t want to see anything bad happen to the guy who named an ant farm ant to make his co-worker laugh.  We meet a staff of nice people… but they don’t stay nice.  Fear breeds desperation—and incentive.

I actually understand why this didn’t rock the box office.  It’s not that kind of film.  But it’s a good one, worthy of your attention; worthy of a lot of attention.  McLean and Gunn are attentive to their characters, and it is their characters—and not their death scenes or the hunt—that make this film work.  But, oooooooh, that chunky gore is just the icing on this fleshy cake.

MY CALL:  This film is for those who want a front seat to the lab bench watching filmmakers experiment and discover their skills.  Because, at first, no one is winning a Nobel Prize or getting rich with their first 10-minute, low budget film.  This is not for mainstream horror buffs, but for the more holistic genre fan who wants to sample the styles and flavors filmmakers have to offer the genre.

MORE Indie Reviews:  Here at MFF we occasionally do horror short film and pre-release indie film reviews on request. Among recent solicited promotions are Order of the Ram (2013; short film), Love in the Time of Monsters (2014; feature length), Interior (2014; feature length), Smothered (2014; feature length), In the Dark (2015; feature length), Brother (2016; short film), the indie techno-horror Other Halves (2016; feature length), Scythe (2016; short film). The Belko Experiment (2016; feature film, mainstream theatrical release), Shallow Waters (2017; short film), Burn (2017; short film) and Tethered (2017; short film).

PREMISE: With an escaped killer on the loose, a babysitter enjoys a quiet nice texting her boyfriend.  Here’s a link to the TRAILER, which doesn’t really give us anything outside of the expectation of something like a killer clown named Giggles.

Disclaimer: This review was solicited by the filmmakers (@MyLittleRascal1 on Twitter) and/or producers who provided privileged access to the film. However, my opinion remains unbiased as I was neither hired nor paid to produce this critical review, nor do I have an investment stake in the film. The only condition to access was that the review be SPOILER FREE.

Whether engaging the teaser/trailer or the first few minutes of the film, it’s immediately evident that the cinematography/photography direction, sound editing, general camerawork and acting are proficient, but with skills not yet honed.

At this point I feel the need to remind viewers that most short films are more like experiments; these are not the final canvased masterpiece, but workings from an artist’s sketchbook before she decided to use the more expensive film, actors, pre-production staff and means, etcetera. It’s sad that such glimpses into indie films often beget negative criticism from folks who just don’t realize that often only a few people (in this case, Roger Glass and Joseph Sorrentino) share the numerous duties of sound mixing, editing, direction, writing, and that—for many of them—it is the dawn of their career as they’re just finding their feet. Even the greatest weaponsmith’s blade must sharpen itself on a whetstone, and that’s exactly what these early films are: the whetstone.

One thing I quite liked about the editing was the use of a snapshot sound with each early cut. A nice stylish complement to the film’s theme. It reminded me of the raw 70s polaroid clang in the newer Texas Chainsaw films.

The staging of the premise is rather generic and classically troped.  Consider this a color-by-numbers so the filmmakers can show you they understand how to use all the tools in the filmmakers’ toolbox.  We have an escaped crazy killer on the loose, a babysitter, a scared child, and news flashes.

Shots like this, audiences of stuffed animals in the rooms of scared children, is actually a standard trope I’ve come to love.

The use of the phone texting harkens to Hush (2016), additionally to When a Stranger Calls (1979, 2006)—it’s an invitingly playful trope I enjoy.  The special effects (make-up, wounds) are obviously imperfect, but make a great effort with obvious financial constraints.  As for the acting, the clown (Barry Tangert) and babysitter (Corrie Graham) did notably well with their roles.  Lastly, the “selfie” title/theme is more gimmicky than appropriate, but gimmicky is quite important in the horror business and, when employed properly, brings smiles to fans.  This is something I’d want to see explored more in the early scenes of a feature length film.

So, what’s the verdict?  Well, this isn’t a film I’d tell a horror fan to watch for the sake of seeing a horror film.  Rather this is the film I’d tell someone to watch if they want a skillset preview from folks who may in the future do the next theatrical insane slasher film.  And I’d watch that film.  There were plenty of stylish additions herein that would stir flavor into the otherwise gory stew of a conventional slasher flick.

MY CALL:  An “apparently” popular slow-burn Japanese horror that, well, I just found boring. Sigh.  MORE MOVIES LIKE Noroi: The Curse:  Well, I honestly haven’t seen a ton. Korean horror offers some greats like Thirst (2009), The Host (2006), The Wailing (2016), or the outstanding Train to Busan (2016). Want super-weird plotty Asian extreme?  I’d skip 3 Extremes (2004)—which doesn’t live up to its name—and instead try Strange Circus (2005), Audition (1999) or Re-Cycle (2006). For truly zany, gore-tastic, exploitative lunacy you should turn to Tokyo Shock cinema.

Masafumi (Jin Muraki; Nightmare Detective, Sakebi/Retribution), a documentary filmmaker specializing in the supernatural, investigates a series of strange paranormal cases that all seem to lead to an obscure legend—that of an ancient conjured demon called the “kagutaba.” The film is an assemblage of the found footage from his investigations and various related clips from Japanese variety shows interviewing psychics or demonstrating their powers. Among them were a young school girl (Rio Kanno; Dark Water) and a television psychic (Marika Matsumoto as herself; Reincarnation), and show hosts Angâruzu (themselves) and Tomomi Eguchi (herself).

Director Kôji Shiraishi (Carved, Occult, Grotesque, Ju-Rei: The Uncanny) barely fairs serviceably with this found footage paranormal investigation film.  It gets off to a slow start and, if we’re being honest, a slow middle and end as well.  It remains just interesting enough for me not to get too bored, but just boring enough for me to wonder if this was all worth the hype.  I’m thinking not—although, it should be noted, most reviews (on Amazon anyway) rave about this film.

We find evidence of psychics, spectral images in video clips, audio analyses revealing hidden ghostly voices, creepy kids, dead baby plots and mysterious deaths.  This all may sound like it would cultivate atmosphere with ease, but only weakly so and, in no way, comparing to the likes of the highly entertaining Ju-on (2002), The Grudge (2004), Grave Encounters (2011) or even the slow-burn White Noise (2005), which all share generally similar concepts but execute more effectively.

This film was brought to my attention on Twitter by several horror fans whose opinions I generally trust. They raved about the film and, upon digging on Amazon, I found a slew of wildly popular reviews.  But I seem to find myself an outlier; I just didn’t like it.  Asian horror often alienates Western viewers due to their plot-heavy, slower paced trends favoring deep story over jumps and effects, and I quite often enjoy them.  I also have no negative bias against found footage or low budget horror.  This one just wasn’t for me.

MY CALL:  These short films are out-damn-standing and I’d say two of them should absolutely be made into feature length films! Great special effects, premises, production value…these were a treat. 

Since the release of Alien: Covenant (2017), I think we’ve all had ample time to reflect on how awful it was that director Neill Blomkamp (District 9, Elysium, Chappie) got booted from his Alien 5 project.  But let’s fret not.  It seems he has been busy making films to show the film studios what a poor decision they made.  And Blomkamp’s answer comes in the form of three short films in Oats Studios Volume 1 (Zygote, Rakka and Firebase) loaded with alien invasions and gory nightmare fuel.

All three films feature alien life, global threats, elements of mental and bodily control or thought invasion, and gooey special effects.

Good news!  You can watch all of these on YouTube for FREE!

Zygote (2017; written and directed by Blomkamp). Premise: Stranded in an Arctic mine, two lone survivors—Dakota Fanning (Hide and Seek, Push) and Jose Pablo Cantillo (Chappie, Disturbia, Crank, The Walking Dead)—are forced to fight for their lives, evading and hiding from a new kind of terror.

With two survivors low on supplies and the mining facility low on power, we are dropped into what would most likely be minute 70 of a feature length film. The shots hint of monstrosities and remoteness while lighting is excellent—not that this is surprising, Blomkamp is an ace. In the best ways possible, this will remind you of The Thing (1982) and Aliens (1986).  I’m even reminded of the animated horror Dead Space (2008).

The special effects of the creature are executed fantastically, affording our creature an otherworldly presence down to its flowing movement.  Damn, it’s creepy!  This monster is the coolest thing I’ve seen in a long time and the gore is on point!  I really felt all the tension as if I had been watching for 90 minutes.

Firebase (2017; written and directed by Blomkamp). Premise: While fighting the Vietnam war, both sides face a new kind of threat that neither of them were prepared for.

The flashbacking vintage film style works as we find soldiers pulling back the skin of apparently non-human entities on the battlefield to reveal hidden monstrosities.

If you think like me, you’ll find glimmers of Predator (1987) lingering among some solid battlescapes in war-torn jungles. But this short thematically doesn’t follow the 1987 alien-hunter playbook. We have tractor beams, war machines, space ships and telekinetically assembled flesh-armor—all quite a spectacle to behold considering this is not a studio feature length film with a matching budget!  Oh, and let’s not forget the gooey, gory deliciousness!

Unlike Zygote, which felt like the final 20 minutes of a feature length film, Firebase seems to provide glimmers of prologue and the transition from the second to final acts building up to the final confrontations.

Rakka (2017; written and directed by Blomkamp). Premise: A tale of a dystopian future in which aliens have colonized the earth and humans struggle to fight back.

Conceptually, at first glance, this is the least original of the three short films. But as it unfolds, it has perhaps the richest plot of them all, and it packs some serious punches. Such visuals as the Eiffel Tower covered in carrion, Mad Max-ian Apocoscapes, and echoes of District 9’s (2009) alien infections.

Again, we are graced with outstanding special effects atypical of the short film realm.  We also find Sigourney Weaver (Avatar, Ghostbusters, Chappie) as our alien resistance leader whose actions slowly unveil the elaborate world-building within.

Like Zygote, this properly feels like part(s) of a feature film that needs to be made.

A lot of folks got a bit nervous after Elysium (2013) and Chappie (2015; which I loved) received mixed reviews. However, I feel that this series of short films should alleviate anyone’s concerns regarding Blomkamp’s creative propensities in the Sci-Fi genre. He really needs to be releasing a major film every year given what I just witnessed.

MY CALL:  This is an old favorite and, having just seen it for the first time in 15+ years, I can see why. The practical effects and humor hold up surprisingly well and the gore is pretty feisty.  Not at all scary, just loads of gross fun.  MORE MOVIES LIKE Fright Night:  Well, The Lost Boys (1987) is similar, but more serious and mature about it. Other somewhat humorous (while still R-rated or PG-13 and bloody) 80s horror include Creepshow (1982), Critters (1986), Vamp (1986), or An American Werewolf in London (1981).

Charley (William Ragsdale; Fright Night 2, The Reaping), his girlfriend Amy (Amanda Bearse; Married with Children) and his quirky friend “Evil” Ed (Stephen Geoffreys; 976-Evil, The Chair, and according to IMDB a bunch of porn) discover that his new neighbor Jerry (Chris Sarandon; The Resurrected, The Sentinel) is actually a vampire!

This 80s horror classic boasts the standard teen tropes when, upon Charley’s initial discovery of his blood-drinking neighbor, he starts yelling “vampire” to everyone (his mother, the police) and, not surprisingly, no one listens to this nonsense.  But thankfully his buddy Ed knows the tricks of the monstrous trade (for some reason; not unlike the Frog Brothers of The Lost Boys).  Also following the standard yet somewhat pleasing tropes of the time, his mother grants invitation to her very single fanged suitor (again, followed suit by The Lost Boys).

Our vampire snacks on apples for dental health, makes some idle threats to a teenager, strangles and toys with the kid when he could have just ripped his head off, and is thwarted by a pencil wound to the hand.  However silly, this all leads us down a rabbit hole of more exaggerated antics when Charley canvases his room with rosaries, crosses, garlic and candles (he must have a big allowance) and then our teenaged protagonists enlist the help of television horror host Peter Vincent (Roddy McDowall; Embryo, Shakma, Fright Night 2), who happens to be an actual expert when it comes to dealing with the fanged undead.

And let’s not forget the needlessly long “seduction dance scene” which, given this film is pretty old, gets me wondering if it wasn’t one of the first movies with such a scene (i.e., a long dance scene whose entire purpose was to be sexy or to seduce, LOL).  There was Return of the Living Dead (1985), although not deliberately “seductive” there was A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge (1985), I only mention the Lost Boys (1987) because that singer might have gotten that saxophone pregnant, perhaps the undead ballerina solo in Evil Dead 2 (1987), then of course there was Night of the Demons (1988) and Night of the Demons 2 (1994) with their blatant and numerous demonic sexy dances.

The first hour of the movie offers little in the way of gore and some decent semi-scary vampire make-up, but in the final 30 minutes things get really good.  I mean, it’s still silly.  But this movie features a looong gory death scene that doubles as a gooey transformation scene (to a werewolf-looking form), a super disgusting melting death, a huge and ugly vampire bat, and the monstrously over-sized vampire mouth that would subsequently be used in the Fright Night (2011) remake and the From Dusk ‘til Dawn (1996) films.

Director Tom Holland (Child’s Play, The Temp, Thinner) really hit this one out of the park.  There are no scares, nor are there meant to be, although the monsters look menacing enough.  This is entirely fun—sometimes funny, sometimes gross-out gory, but always a rewatchable joy that withstands the test of time.

MY CALL:  This movie is awesome…but bad.  But it’s not a bad movie really…yet it is bad like a 90s Schwarzenegger movie…but one of the better 90s Schwarzenegger movies.  There, now you understand, right?  MORE MOVIES LIKE The Arrival:  For more mid-90s sci-fi alien invasions threatening humanity, I highly recommend Independence Day (1996), Men in Black (1997) and Species (1995).  Sphere (1998) and Contact (1997) took less invasion-y approaches.  If you want to kick the bonkers into high gear, go for Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (2017), Jupiter Ascending (2015) and The Fifth Element (1997).  Speaking of bonkers Sci-Fi films…we’ve podcasted about many of these films.  Check out Episode 84: Sci-Fi Past & Present, The Arrival (1996) and Arrival (2016) and Episode 81: Bonkers Sci-Fi Past & Present Extravaganza, The Fifth Element & Jupiter Ascending.

Writer and director David Twohy (the Pitch Black/Riddick trilogy, A Perfect Getaway) is no stranger to thrillers, having written The Fugitive (1993) and Waterworld (1995) as well as Warlock (1989).  He’s had experience with horror, suspense, and fantastic worlds littered with post-apocalyptic jet skis.  Combining many such notions (but no jet skis), this might just by Twohy’s most zany film ever.

Climate researcher Ilana (Lindsay Crouse; Mr. Brooks, Imposter) discovers a green grassy meadow lush with wildflowers in the middle of the arctic, as if the sun picked that one spot to turn up the heat and melt the snow.  One problem: even if it was preternaturally warmed in that single patch of land, it’s the arctic! Where did the seeds for those 15 species of plants come from!?!?! How about the nutrients needed to grow? But whatever, Twohy did make write a horror movie about a time-traveling male witch modeled after The Terminator (1984). So we need not be so critical. LOL

Meanwhile across the globe, astronomers Zane (Charlie Sheen; Machete Kills, The Chase) and Calvin (Richard Schiff; Man of Steel, The West Wing) stumble across the discovery of a lifetime when they record an alien radio signal from another galaxy.  They know they’re on to something major, but their administrative superior Phil Gordian (Ron Silver; Timecop, The Entity) is understandably skeptical.  Worse yet, due to suspiciously timed budget cuts, Zane gets laid off.

Despite getting fired and failing to confirm the signal with colleagues managing other satellite stations, Gordian agrees to pass the signal recording to decoding analysists…but instead destroys it as soon as Zane is out the door and sets him up as a fraud.  Oh, and his love life has been getting rocky with his girlfriend Char (Teri Polo; Meet the Parents).  Things just aren’t going very well for Zane.

“Bad Movie” Highlights:  No astronomer has hair that is so carefully manicured and attended with product.  Even when he is manic, paranoid, hasn’t shaved in days and on the verge of a nervous breakdown over being framed…his hair is always immaculate.

Now blacklisted from astronomy and working as a satellite cable technician, Zane highjacks an entire county’s dish service to search for his alien radio signal.  I’m safely going to assume this is not plausible, and that we have wandered into a bonkers movie.  After a trip to radio shack and some shady “free upgrades” for cable subscribers, Zane has created a NASA SETI-capable radio analysis lab above his garage.  I’m happy to afford the movie some leeway, but somewhere between the attempted assassination-by-bathtub scene and the knee-popping grasshopper jump I think all reason has been thrown out the window.

“Bad Movie” Highlights:  The reverse-knee high jump. The effects were laughable.

Climatologist Ilana has been looking into more strange things as well, like impossible predictions that global warming will cook the planet in 10 years.  Oh, remember when I said all reason was thrown out the window?  Well, Zane sees a now mustached and “more ethnic-looking” Gordian-clone working as a security guard at a Mexican power facility!  And, of course, there was the subsequent assassination attempt, this time using a pair of perfectly harmless scorpions that your kids could buy at a pet store in New Jersey.  Way to utilize that alien super-technology!

Twohy really tried to make this story global.  Zane starts in the southwestern United States and Ilana in the arctic, both ending up tracking the alien signal and global warming trends (respectively) to Oaxaca, Mexico.  Despite this global aim, the $25 million budget film only grossed $14 million box office.  Bummer.  Because, although I’m admittedly making fun of this movie quite a bit, it was a BLAST and I was happy to buy this on blu-ray!  This is the kind of silly movie that maintains a strong sense of urgency—like True Lies (1994), Timecop (1994) or Total Recall (1990).

The alien CGI effects are clearly dated, but not bad. They may not stand up to Jurassic Park (1993) or Independence Day (1996), but they also didn’t enjoy such a big budget.  Despite the more humble financing, the diversity of effects is ambitious!  Lots of alien future tech, numerous alien scenes, and the most joyously silly effect was when Zane used the alien transformation chamber and became “Latin Charlie Sheen.”

“Bad Movie” Highlights:  Latino Charlie Sheen: “I look like a can of smashed assholes.” Best quote ever!

Yes, the aliens have been living among us.  And much like They Live (1988), they have commandeered industry to use our economy and environment against us.  But no one should fear, for as long as there’s a shirtless Charlie Sheen (freshly waxed, as you would expect any astronomer to be), humanity will persevere.  You’ve gotta’ hand it to Sheen.  He’s no Hugh Jackman, but he’s trying!

“Bad Movie” Highlights:  Did they think Sheen had a great body?  Because he spends a lot of time showing off his freshly waxed and often sweat-glazed body running around without a shirt.

If you haven’t seen this, you should.  If you don’t believe me, you should listen to our podcast about this movie (Episode 84: Sci-Fi Past & Present, The Arrival (1996) and Arrival (2016), and then go see this movie!

MY CALL:  Not much in the way of story or substance, but totally worth watching for outstanding characters and style.  MORE MOVIES LIKE The Devil’s Candy:  Well, Deathgasm (2015) and The Gate (1987) have other approaches to metal in horror. For more in the way of style of substance, I’d go with The House of the Devil (2009).

Stringy-haired and donning a smattering of tattoos, Jesse (Ethan Embry; Late Phases, The Guest, Cheap Thrills) is a struggling artist moving with his wife (Shiri Appleby; The Thirteenth Floor, Swinfan) and daughter (Kiara Glasco; Bitten, Maps to the Stars) into their dream home in rural Texas.  Jesse is a pragmatic metalhead and, otherwise, a pretty normal guy who playfully connects with his teenage daughter by headbanging to power cords as his wife smiles and understandingly rolls her eyes. Their family dynamic is actually very sweet.

But, alas, their house has a dark history.  Much as with the Amityville Horror (1979, 2005), a curse of others’ past enshrouds the house and seeps into our patriarch as growling whispers of Satanic influence pepper the silence.

We have an array of creepy supporting characters including a deeply disturbed man (Pruitt Taylor Vince; Constantine, Identity, Creature) and a sinister art dealer (Tony Amendola; Annabelle, Castlevania) among others.  It also has its moments of brutality, but it doesn’t dwell on gore to be effective or disturbing.  That’s not what “gets” you.  Bad things happen to good people.  Very bad things; things that could really happen.  When you see it transpire you’ll feel helpless.  You care about this family and they don’t run amok making stupid decisions.

Director and writer Sean Byrne (The Loved Ones) delivers a fair perspective to a metalhead character.  Ethan Embry gives an outstanding performance as a kind husband and sympathetic father who simply happens to attune to heavy metal music.  Splendid acting and credible characters show us their relationships with no flat exposition to be found.  In fact, the admixture of metal and caring family values seems totally…normal.  And when those relationships degenerate or become threatened, that is the urgency cultivated within us.

This film thrives on its characters and atmosphere, but the story itself feels weak and undeveloped.  We find rich potential in Jesse’s infernal connection to his artwork, but everything around his family like the house’s history, this curse, the Devil’s influence, the parallel to the music…none of it seems to find its footing or anything resembling explanation.  As with Ti West’s The House of the Devil (2009), this is a film to be enjoyed for its style, not substance, and likewise will finish with much less impact than the first hour.

MY CALL:  This is a surprisingly decent movie and so much more than just a fight movie. Snipes and Rhames do great in and out of the ring.  MORE MOVIES LIKE Undisputed:  Well, you should absolutely watch the sequels all the way through Boyka: Undisputed IV (2017)! Other prison fight movies about illegal competition/fighting rings include The Condemned (2007) and The Running Man (1987). Other worthwhile unconventional boxing films include Gladiator (1992) and Diggstown (1992).

Director Walter Hill (Bullet to the Head, Last Man Standing, Red Heat, The Warriors) brings us the kind of organized prison competition that clearly influenced the style and pattern of Death Race (2008; based on 1975’s Death Race 2000). But where this differs from its sequels and other influenced successors is that this is no “action flick.” This is actually a pretty solid movie that doesn’t need to rely solely on its action.

Charged for a crime he denies committing, heavyweight boxing champ (46-1-0) George “The Iceman” Chambers (Ving Rhames; Piranha 3D, the Mission: Impossible series) finds himself in the very same prison as another purported 68-0 “undefeated champ” of the California State Inter-Prison Boxing Program.  Naturally, he questions the validity of any such claims in boxing greatness. “There’s only one champ in here!”

We first meet Munroe Hutchin (Wesley Snipes; The Expendables 3, Blade 1-3, Rising Sun) dismantling a much larger opponent (Nils Allen Stewart; Bloodsport 2, The Quest, Barb Wire) while showing off his jacked body and surgically vicious technique.  He’s the Iceman’s opposite in every way, in and out of the ring.

The venerable, imprisoned mob boss Mendy (Peter Falk; Next, The Princess Bride), his right-hand man Chuy (Jon Seda; Bad Boys II, Bullet to the Head) and Hutchins’ corner man Ratbag (Fisher Stevens; Hackers, Awake) plant the seeds of competition, taunting the Iceman and questioning his skill.  Meanwhile, Iceman’s cellmate Mingo (Wes Studi; The Last of the Mohicans, Penny Dreadful) and manager Yank (Dayton Callie; Sons of Anarchy, Halloween II) try to steer him from trouble during his sentence.  They set up a high stakes fight between the two champs.

Unlike subsequent movies in which the wealthy warden runs the show (often through criminal means), the head prison guard Mercker (Michael Rooker; Guardians of the Galaxy Vols. 1-2, The Belko Experiment, The Walking Dead) coordinates and serves as the official for the fight.

Two things kept this movie from being great. For one thing, the training scenes were weak. Where’s my training montage? Secondly, the championship bout had no scoring. When Rocky fought Ivan Drago (Rocky IV) the action choreography was great, brutal, and well-staged to cue up emotion—but what truly catalyzed the experience was War playing in the background.  However, this movie makes every effort (and often successfully) to be substantial. So it should come as no surprise that the boxing/fighting scenes are not numerous. But when we get them, they’re good!  Not outstanding (like Rocky IV), but they bask in the excitement of seeing two well-known chiseled actors in the ring instead of an A-list hero and some no-name-actor foe.

MY CALL:  This is a great, stylish, edgy sequel to an old favorite loaded with cool effects, sleek vampires and soft humor. Just great 80s fun!  MORE MOVIES LIKE Fright Night 2:  Well, after you see Fright Night (1985), The Lost Boys (1987) is similar, but more serious and mature about it. Other somewhat humorous (while still R-rated or PG-13 and bloody) 80s horror include Creepshow (1982), Critters (1986), Vamp (1986), or An American Werewolf in London (1981).

Following in writer/director Tom Holland’s (Child’s Play, The Temp, Thinner, Fright Night) footsteps, director Tommy Lee Wallace (Halloween III: Season of the Witch, It) has some big shoes to fill.  And you know what? I think he did a great job!

After years of therapy, Charley (William Ragsdale; Fright Night, The Reaping) has come to believe that his entire vampire experience was all a delusion since, of course, vampires don’t exist.  So when Regine’s fanged coven comes for him, his girlfriend Alex (Traci Lind; Class of 1999, Spellcaster) and Peter Vincent (Roddy McDowall; Embryo, Shakma, Fright Night) must come to his aid.

Led by the sultry Regine (Julie Carmen; In the Mouth of Madness), Bozworth (Brian Thompson; The Terminator, Alien Nation, Nightwish), Louie (Jon Gries; TerrorVision, The Monster Squad) and Belle (Russell Clark; choreographer from Vamp) round out her vampiric team seeking revenge against Charley Brewster for killing her brother, Jerry Dandridge (Chris Sarandon in Fright Night).

Belle is a roller-skating vampire of other-worldly androgyny (a perfect 80s vamp), Bozworth knows the taxonomy of every insect he ghoulishly eats with delight, Louie is strikingly werewolf-like (much like Evil Ed), and Regine is a walking sex pot with long sexy fangs. It’s clear that Tommy Lee Wallace is modeling this evil crew after Tom Holland’s, but that’s just fine with me. Each character has some parallels to their 1985 models, but all stand out as interesting and different.

Part 1’s tone is also largely preserved as everything is still quite sexualized and often humorous. I can’t help but to feel that this sequel is a bit more silly (or just sort of “out there”) and just a tad less effective, however it remains a very entertaining favorite.  It has injected a bit more 80s-ness and an enhanced sense of dramatic flair.

The special effects likewise parallel the original and, despite having a lower budget, the special effects are somewhat comparable to part 1.  I especially enjoyed Louie’s wolfish bat hybrid make-up and Bozworth’s entomological death was also a guilty pleasure. The “melting death scenes” lacked the delicious gooiness and lengthy elaboration of part 1’s, but I must say I was thrilled with the finale death and Regine’s creature effects (as a gargoyle-like bat hybrid and later like some skinless menace out of Hellraiser).

It seemed that the lower budget didn’t noticeably hinder this effects team too much—but it did shorten the effects scenes and how much time we spend seeing monster make-up on screen (e.g., Jerry’s various stages of vampiric transformation in part 1 got loads of screen time).

We also still get BIG toothy demon mouths!

In this sequel, we find Charley in a similar situation to his last girlfriend (in 1985). Charley’s “exposure” to Regine results in some symptoms like light sensitivity…much as we observed in My Best Friend is a Vampire or The Lost Boys, both from 1987 and both of which were clearly influenced heavily by Fright Night (1985). I guess the influence has come full circle.  The sexy dance of seduction scene (now with Charley) is done in a manner much more classical to the vampire genre.  Fright Night (1985) did this in quite the raunchy manner.

I remain VERY pleased with both the original and this sequel.  The original had more charm (perhaps stemming from its originality), and this sequel feels more sleek and stylish.  Both really went for it and they remain gratifying even today, 30 years after they were made!

MY CALL:  Very jumpy, very creepy, and very much more worthy of your time than part 1!  MORE MOVIES LIKE Annabelle: Creation:  Well, The Conjuring (2013; podcast discussion of The Conjuring 2), Annabelle (2014; podcast discussion of Annabelle) and The Conjuring 2 (2016) round out The Conjuring Universe. For more evil doll movies one may venture Dead Silence (2007), Dolls (1987), Dolly Dearest (1981)  Puppet Master 1-5 (1989-1994), The Boy (2016), Child’s Play (1988), Curse of Chucky (2013) and even Poltergeist (1982; that evil clown was twisted).

Twelve years after the tragic loss of their daughter Bee (Samara Lee; The Last Witch Hunter), doll-maker Samuel (Anthony LaPaglia; Innocent Blood, So I Married an Axe Murderer) and his now ailing wife Esther (Miranda Otto; War of the Worlds, What Lies Beneath) agree to offer their home as an orphanage for a nun (Stephanie Sigman; Narcos) and six girls. Linda (Lulu Wilson; Ouija: Origin of Evil, Deliver Us from Evil) and her friend are drawn to a doll hidden away in Bee’s bedroom and…well, you know…there’s an evil doll, demonic possession…bad stuff happens.

The Conjuring Universe SIDEBAR: This has been labeled “the next chapter in The Conjuring Universe,” and a Conjuring movie is exactly what this feels like.  Well, The Conjuring (2013) was so outstanding that Annabelle (2014) couldn’t be expected to measure up. But falling far below that, evil doll movies practically make themselves yet Annabelle was an absolutely incompetent horror film that should disappoint fans of the genre whether they were birthed in the era of serious slashers, classic Hammer releases, or campy 80s slapstick gore-fests. The only way Annabelle made it to the big screen was by riding the tidal wave of hype created by its connection to The Conjuring. Then along came The Conjuring 2 (2016)—which felt a lot like Insidious “Chapter 4”—which was clearly made more for the fans than the critics as it focused more on being excitingly jump-scary than on standard merits or sleek plotiness.  This sequel introduced The Nun (i.e., the demon Valek) and gave a fine nod to Annabelle.  Following suit, Creation offers a mysterious wink harbingering the upcoming Nun film (same writer as Creation) and then finishes transitioning us directly into the opening scene of Annabelle (2014).

I wasn’t at all surprised to learn this was directed by David F. Sandberg (Lights Out), as it felt very much like Lights Out (2016) meets The Conjuring 2 (2016) in terms of scare-staging, the use of darkness and flickering lights, the super twitchy monster manifestations, and the roller-coasting dozens of jump scares. I should repeat part of that: DOZENS of jump scares.  Holding together far more soundly and satisfyingly than Annabelle (2014), this plot still wasn’t terribly substantial. It had “just enough,” with the story feeling neither deep nor shallow, and quite familiar without being phoned in or rehashed.  But, then again, we are in The Conjuring Universe and the conduits by which evil manifests in our present cinescape seem to follow the same rules or patterns as we have now witnessed in a total of four films.  It’s the kind of familiarity we find in a Freddy, Jason, Pinhead or Myers sequel…we know the general rules, but we also expect some new angle in each new film to come.

Now I just called this “familiar.” But, make no mistake, it’s quite exciting after a somewhat slow introduction to our premise.  But then becomes exciting if you enjoy jump scares.  As I mentioned earlier, this film thrives on them. You’ll hear something creepy, stare into a pitch-black hallway or doorway for 8 seconds, and press your head into your seat to brace yourself for the inevitable incoming scare.  This may bother folks looking for the next horror Oscar contender, but people just looking for a fun date night or a great popcorn horror will be in for a good time.  In fact, I’d call this outstanding popcorn horror.

What gore we get is good, the acting is all on point, the demon monster effects were VERY creepy, and despite the high frequency of jump-scares there were some seriously legitimate scares as well.  I really appreciated that all that this film tried to do; give us a prequel, connect adequately to both The Conjuring (2013) and Annabelle (2014), provide a semblance of continuity, and serve as a stand-alone horror film.  And, perhaps its best quality, it never really felt like an evil doll movie.  It felt more like a mix between a cursed object and a demonic haunting/possession/presence.  It certainly kept me on my toes.

Overall, I’d say I was quite pleased.  I’ll certainly buy it and, due to the sheer joy derived from all the jump-scares, I look forward to sharing this with someone who hasn’t yet seen it.

MY CALL:  This is exactly the kind of film I want to see funded…but more funded.  MORE MOVIES LIKE The Barn:  Other Halloween horrors include Trick ‘r Treat (2007), Night of the Demons (1988), Night of the Demons 2 (1994), Halloween (1978, 2007) and Halloween II (1981, 2009).

MORE Indie Reviews:  Here at MFF we occasionally do horror short film and pre-release indie film reviews on request. Among recent solicited promotions are Order of the Ram (2013; film), Love in the Time of Monsters (2014; feature length), Interior (2014; feature length), Smothered (2014; feature length), In the Dark (2015; feature length), Brother (2016; film), Other Halves (2016; feature length), Scythe (2016; film), The Belko Experiment (2016; feature film, mainstream theatrical release), Shallow Waters (2017; short), Burn (2017; short), Tethered (2017; short) and We Love Selfies (2017; short).

Disclaimer: This review was unsolicited (I requested access to the film). I was neither hired nor paid to produce this critical review, nor do I have an investment stake in the film. This was basically leaked to me.

A group of young trick or treaters break the town’s rule about Halloween and go to the old abandoned barn for a night of mischief.  Strangely, there’s a jack-o-lantern waiting for them and they awaken the Candy Corn Scarecrow, the Pumpkin Man and the Boogeyman—the demonic trio that would form the 30-year-old Legend of the Barn.

This 80s throwback plays to the standard 80s-ish tropes.  Some generally kind-intentioned misunderstood teenagers who love of Halloween, one of our protagonists invites his crush along, there’s a skating rink and silly dialogue, parents never seem to understand, a Halloween expert spouts exposition about the folklore behind Halloween and the true meaning of trick or treat, 80s boobs, teens don’t heed the expert’s warnings, and the black dude dies first!  While tropiness can be annoying in modern releases, they feel more inviting and forgivable here.

I enjoyed a few 80s-esque shots…e.g., the silhouettes of trick or treaters against a hazy moonlit sky—like something straight out of Halloween III (1982).  Probably my favorite moment of the film; kudos to the director of photography (Zane Hershberger).  But this is not just a stylistic 80s throwback, it actually looks like you’re watching a VHS movie!

It gets off to a feisty start (i.e., the flashback opening), but I was really feeling the humble budget (~$40k) for the majority of the effects scenes.  Not all of them, but most.  Someone needs to give these guys some money so they can do more with their next project!  The premise is playful and fun and everything horror should be, but stronger financing could have produced the level of gore-rended latex flesh that I hoped to find and a little more on-screen realization of those effects.  The filmmakers/crew clearly gave 110% and there were numerous (often technically weak, but enthusiastic and appreciated) effects scenes, but most of the time the “demons” just felt like murderous slasher dudes until the last third of the film when the effects appear to have leveled up.  I could sense the Night of the Demons (1988) style being emulated (intentional or not)…but this just didn’t quite hit that mark—again, I blame money more than anything.  Some will argue budget matters less than filmmaking.  But this was made for next to nothing, which is really a strong attribute.  In fact, I had assumed the budget was higher. I’d love to see a “making of” video about how they stretched their dollar on some of those gags (e.g., slicing a head in half, crushing faces).

Director and writer Justin M. Seaman (10/31, Cryptids) and his effects team made an ambitious attempt that leaves me a bit conflicted.  I really want people to see what they’ve done and visualize what this film could have been with more financial support, yet I’m not tempted to recommend it to folks looking for a fun fright flick for the evening (unless they have an appreciation for the challenges of filmmaking).  After all, it’s tough making a serviceable horror film on a tiny budget (and NOT a found footage shake-o-rama in which no one can even see how cheap it is).  I don’t recommend watching this for fun, but I DO recommend watching this to see something that will make you proud as a horror fan or filmmaker.  Again, simply as a horror movie this is not awesome.  But consider this: The Gallows (2015) had a $100k budget and was guerilla-filmed found footage featuring no more effects than an occasional length of rope and someone getting shaky-cam dragged into the darkness.  There were no creatures, no make-up (worth mentioning), no blood, no wounds, no boobs (just sayin’), no nothing.  I hated that movie and, honestly, more money wouldn’t have helped it much given the lack of vision I witnessed on screen.  The Barn, on the other hand, had 40% of that budget and really went for it!  There were well over a dozen practical effects scenes with blood, guts, severed body parts, monster make-up, impalements, dismemberments, stabbings, eye gauges and head smashes…and they did it all with the Hollywood-equivalent of couch cushion change!  And OMFG can we stop to appreciate the awesome theme song played during the beginning of the credits!?!

The Barn offers the promise.  And that’s what I hope to find when I do indie reviews: promise of a better tomorrow for the horror genre.

MY CALL:  Relying far more on its outstanding cast than effects, this wasn’t so great “as a remake.”  But remains very entertaining.  Let’s be honest.  Nothing can compare to the original Fright Night (1985)!  MORE MOVIES LIKE Fright Night:  Well, you should really see Fright Night (1985) and Fright Night II (1988).

REMAKE SIDEBAR: Other quality horror remakes include Friday the 13^th (2009), Carrie (2013), Evil Dead (2013), The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003), The Hills Have Eyes (2006), An American Werewolf in Paris (1997), Halloween (2007), The Fly (1986), Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978), The Thing (1982; yes, this was a remake) and The Mummy (1999; adventure genre). Those to avoid include Poltergeist (2015), The Thing (2011; a prequel/remake), Cabin Fever (2016), A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010), Night of the Demons (2009), Body Snatchers (1993; the second remake), The Invasion (2007; the third remake), War of the Worlds (2005) and The Mummy (2017; total adventure-style reboot-imagining).

Director Craig Gillespie (The Million Dollar Arm, The Finest Hours) wasn’t known for horror, nor is he now (beyond this movie). But here he is making a contemporized remake of the very first contemporary vampire film ever: Fright Night (1985). In doing so, we relocate the Brewster family from northern California to Las Vegas, a city in which night owls and late shifts are the norm and children of the night need no camouflage.

Charley Brewster (Anton Yelchin; Odd Thomas, Green Room) is a solid iteration of the original. He and is single mother (Toni Collette; Krampus, The Sixth Sense) find a handsome single man moving in next door and Charley’s love-hungry girlfriend Amy (Imogen Poots; 28 Weeks Later, Green Room) is the first to notice when his attention deviates away from her advances to the goings-on of his mysterious neighbor.  2011’s Evil Ed (Christopher Mintz-Plasse; This is the End) offers context to two once-best friends who have now grown apart, but are now forced to face their local threat; whereas 1985’s Evil Ed is clearly strange and is, to some degree, a friend or ex-friend (or something), yet neither his nickname nor his relationship with 80s-Charley are explained.

Our new Jerry (Colin Farrell; Total Recall, True Detective) is quite the change up from 1985’s Chris Sarandon (The Resurrected, Fright Night). Sarandon was seductive, smooth, and offered every opportunity for his would-be protagonist victims to survive if they would just look the other way or accept whatever he offered; more forgiving and, perhaps, wise from his lengthened undead years.  But our fanged Farrell, while cagily charming, is typically more sleazy, crude and predatory before his patience is even tested—creating a more cat-and-mouse semi-slasher tone in lieu of occult mysticism.

Jerry also moves in with little baggage, and nary a ghoulish servant or subordinate vampire in sight.  I liked the bullying humor and domestic kinship Billy (Jonathan Stark; House II: The Second Story) brought to the original.  For me it was disappointing finding nothing analogous in role or tone. But a great contemporized remake victory is found in Peter Vincent (David Tennant; Doctor Who), who feels perfectly modeled after an occult-themed Criss Angel (Mind Freak) with a passion for vampirology and a sarcastic cowardice.

I love that we go from this (ABOVE), to this (BELOW)…

Overall, this remake makes decent use of parallels to the iconic scenes of the original, but really they pack none of the atmospheric punch. This is a great flick, a “good” horror movie, but it can’t hold a candle to the original. That said, this remake clearly succeeds at giving us quality entertainment. Yes, I’ve seen it more than once. Yes, I will watch it again. And yes, I bought it. But no, I won’t watch it a fraction as often as the original.  Why…?

2011 vs 1985

We get a toothy maw transformation, some Jedi-jumping and wall-crawling, and all manner of blood gushes.  But where’s the rest?

2011 vs 1985

This just reminds me of Van Helsing (2004)

Truth is, these CGI effects lack the practical old school charm of Amy’s gaping monstrous mouth. In fact, the effects generally don’t impress much at all.  That’s not the film’s strength.  This remake succeeds on the merits of its cast, and everyone seems to do a fine job.  From Tenant’s quips to Charley’s frantic desperation and Ed’s hammed up campy vampire shenanigans, I enjoyed this a lot despite the lack of any memorable effects.  It barely does any justice to writer/director Tom Holland’s (Child’s Play, The Temp, Thinner, Fright Night) original but that doesn’t mean it’s not good.  Give it a chance.

MY CALL:  More interesting than scary, this is a horror movie for young beginners still very green to the genre. Hard to recommend outside of nostalgia or just for the sake of witnessing Curry’s own Pennywise.  MORE MOVIES LIKE It:  For more movie adaptations based on Stephen King’s books and other work, try Creepshow (1982), Cujo (1983), Needful Things (1993), The Night Flier (1997) or Pet Sematary (1989), to name a few. If it’s evil clowns you desire then there is only one absolute: Killer Klowns from Outer Space (1988). If you simply enjoyed the band of young misfits facing evil, try the Netflix Original series Stranger Things. And, for those who like creepy hauntings of our inner demons, try the very dark Flatliners (1990; which also has a 2017 remake).

In 1960, a group of pre-teen friends face an evil demon posing as a clown only to reunite 30 years later when It returns to their hometown. Mixing flashbacks with present day, these kids lose loved ones, are haunted by those they’ve lost, and are taunted by an evil that senses their worst fears.

The cast includes Jonathan Brandis (The NeverEnding Story II, Stepfather II), John Ritter (Bride of Chucky, Stay Tuned), Seth Green (Idle Hands, Buffy the Vampire Slayer) and Annette O’Toole (Smallville, Cat People). They all do about as well as they can with the scripts they were given, and deliver some dry lines with much passion.  At times it’s a bit exhausting, other times redeeming.

Pennywise the clown (Tim Curry; Legend, The Rocky Horror Picture Show, Congo) is the strongest suit of the film. With his raspy villainous voice, Curry brings a Billy Goats Gruff menace with his emphatic eyes warning of foul machinations. Most alarming is that we understand how young Georgie was fooled by his façade however clearly evil It may have been to adult eyes.

The blood splatters, creature effects and supernatural horrors aren’t really scary.  Outside of Pennywise (i.e., Curry’s performance), the horror elements are very weak although numerous. I find them more like Are You Afraid of the Dark (1990-2000); a young adult-esque creep factor.  But what the film lacks in horror, it compensates with youthful drama in such a manner that I would consider this a good horror movie for beginners—younger beginners.  Of course, this was made for TV. But that is no excuse for the often hokey and not infrequently soap operatic dialogue guiding us through heavy-handed exposition and naïve melodrama.  Although, I’ve got to give credit where it’s due.  The “surprise kiss” scene was really eerie, the “Georgie-Pennywise sewer drain” scene remains iconic, and I enjoyed the historical snippets that piece together Pennywise’s local history.

You’ll find mild influences from Stand By Me (1986) and some film stylings from the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise (1984-1988).  There’s even a bit of a Goonies-like comradery among our protagonists as they encounter one bizarre event after another.

The randomness of the special effects-driven scenes feels a bit haphazard (e.g., the fortune cookie scene, the battle in the sewer, the balloons in the bookstore, the Pennywise dog attack), and then crescendos in a lackluster finale when—BIG SPOILER HERE—our protagonists fight a giant spider monster (combination of stop-motion and animatronics)—END BIG SPOILER.  Our heroes put faith in slingshots and magical inhalers and, well, I found it all silly…maybe even just plain dumb.  Meh.

Director Tommy Lee Wallace (Fright Night Part II, Halloween III: Season of the Witch) delivered It in a three-hour two-part TV mini-series whose elements span all manner of quality.  I felt the first 80-90 minutes (part 1 if you have the old VHS set) was far superior to the second half, but not without its aforementioned faults.

There are basically two reasons to watch the original It: 1) you want to compare the remake’s Pennywise to Tim Curry’s original; or 2) pure nostalgia. I fear its “TV-ness” and young adult style (which is quite immature by today’s YA standards) is just too pervasively flawed to recommend to horror fans who didn’t grow up with it.  But still, this isn’t a bad adaptation overall.  It just caters to a younger, less horrorsperienced crowd.  Almost like a horror movie for “family movie night.”