Search
Toby's Room
8.0
Rate It
Book
Toby's Room is the second novel in Pat Barker's Life Class Trilogy, returning to the First World War...
IC
Identity Crisis: One Family's Experience of Manic Depression
Sally E. Dalglish and M.K. Dalglish
Book
No mother has endured four children with the manic-depressive gene for 36 years, and, in league with...
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Videodrome (1983) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
Max Renn is the president of Civic TV channel 83, a channel known for showcasing the most erotic and violent programming that anyone has ever come across. As you can imagine, the channel has a specific audience and Max takes it upon himself to find the next big thing for the network. Everything he comes across is too tame until Max gets ahold of Harlan. Harlan is an employee who specializes in pirate video broadcasts. It's through Harlan that Max is first exposed to Videodrome, an hour program that centralizes on torture and murder. Max becomes obsessed with Videodrome and realizes it may be the next step for channel 83. He does everything within his power to find out more about Videodrome ranging from where it's originally broadcast to tracking down the original supplier and even watching countless hours of bootleg videotapes. In addition to his obsession, Max begins hallucinating. Through his investigations, he finds out Videodrome transmissions cause tumors in the brain of whoever is able to actually watch it and therefore alter reality through hallucination. As Max begins to lose touch with reality, the people behind Videodrome have bigger plans for Max. Much bigger.
Videodrome is an interesting sci-fi horror film. It's the type of film that gets better with each viewing. It's also got some pretty amazing make-up effects by the incredible Rick Baker (An American Werewolf in London, The Frighteners). So while the film does show its age at times (mainly during the segment where Max is having his hallucination recorded by Spectacular Optacle owner, Barry Convex), the majority of the special effects hold up incredibly well after 26 years. It also boasts one of the most original and intriguing death scenes (Barry Convex's) of any horror film.
The David Cronenberg helmed psycological thriller is more than just great special effects. In all honesty, it's spectacularly odd. The hallucinations alone will leave some viewers scratching their heads, but there is a clever and intelligent story beneath all the weirdness. The story focuses on TV, which is a source of entertainment that everyone relies on and it takes aim at sex and violence. The two themes people are attracted to the most, but the consequences the film comes up with for watching a program that uses these themes to the extreme is truly one of its defining moments. So while whipping a TV set may seem like an illogical idea to most, Videodrome's superb writing makes it seem almost logical. The fact that the film concentrates on something like television that everyone can relate to while creating an intelligent reasoning for it makes the entire experience more believable.
Videodrome is a cult classic for a good reason. While it may seem odd at first, it's actually an intelligent and well-made sci-fi horror film. That old layer of skin may look and feel like a film that is too weird for most audiences that's outdated and doesn't make any sense, but beneath that old flesh is the new flesh. In this case, the new flesh is actually a superb film with a quick witted script, a terrific story, special effects that hold up to this day, and just a worthwhile experience overall. It's a cult classic that's worthy of being added to any horror or sci-fi fan's collection. Long live the new flesh.
Videodrome is an interesting sci-fi horror film. It's the type of film that gets better with each viewing. It's also got some pretty amazing make-up effects by the incredible Rick Baker (An American Werewolf in London, The Frighteners). So while the film does show its age at times (mainly during the segment where Max is having his hallucination recorded by Spectacular Optacle owner, Barry Convex), the majority of the special effects hold up incredibly well after 26 years. It also boasts one of the most original and intriguing death scenes (Barry Convex's) of any horror film.
The David Cronenberg helmed psycological thriller is more than just great special effects. In all honesty, it's spectacularly odd. The hallucinations alone will leave some viewers scratching their heads, but there is a clever and intelligent story beneath all the weirdness. The story focuses on TV, which is a source of entertainment that everyone relies on and it takes aim at sex and violence. The two themes people are attracted to the most, but the consequences the film comes up with for watching a program that uses these themes to the extreme is truly one of its defining moments. So while whipping a TV set may seem like an illogical idea to most, Videodrome's superb writing makes it seem almost logical. The fact that the film concentrates on something like television that everyone can relate to while creating an intelligent reasoning for it makes the entire experience more believable.
Videodrome is a cult classic for a good reason. While it may seem odd at first, it's actually an intelligent and well-made sci-fi horror film. That old layer of skin may look and feel like a film that is too weird for most audiences that's outdated and doesn't make any sense, but beneath that old flesh is the new flesh. In this case, the new flesh is actually a superb film with a quick witted script, a terrific story, special effects that hold up to this day, and just a worthwhile experience overall. It's a cult classic that's worthy of being added to any horror or sci-fi fan's collection. Long live the new flesh.
Andy K (10821 KP) rated Zoo (2018) in Movies
Oct 19, 2019
Saving your marriage or zombie apocalypse?
I have to admit being new to the world of British cinema (since I live in the US) so those extreme British accents are still a struggle for me at times (especially when you guys talk so fast!). I have to admit to even putting subtitles on a few times so I could get all the words.
Interesting premise of this film and the recommendation from a friend to watch.
How would you feel if a zombie infestation began right while your marriage was on the rocks? Which would be your priority to correct?
This young couple grapples with this exact issue and it is relatively successful. They spend time disagreeing with each other and moping about in their flat since they cannot go outside without having to deal with infected hoards trying to devour them. They begin having meaningful dialogue and then they get a knock at their door. A random couple ask if they can come and hide within to remove themselves from danger and are obliged. They immediately become a nuisance asking for provisions which are already in short supply and to "borrow a toothbrush"? I thought that was funny.
Their stay at the apartment is short, but long enough to have the couple start to unite themselves against their new house guests. After their departure, the couple becomes more intimate and work on their relationship before even more unwanted guests arrive.
The dialogue was a bit corny at times, but worked overall. I enjoyed the fresh take on the zombie genre. If romantic comedy zombie horror is a new sub genre I'm all in.
Interesting premise of this film and the recommendation from a friend to watch.
How would you feel if a zombie infestation began right while your marriage was on the rocks? Which would be your priority to correct?
This young couple grapples with this exact issue and it is relatively successful. They spend time disagreeing with each other and moping about in their flat since they cannot go outside without having to deal with infected hoards trying to devour them. They begin having meaningful dialogue and then they get a knock at their door. A random couple ask if they can come and hide within to remove themselves from danger and are obliged. They immediately become a nuisance asking for provisions which are already in short supply and to "borrow a toothbrush"? I thought that was funny.
Their stay at the apartment is short, but long enough to have the couple start to unite themselves against their new house guests. After their departure, the couple becomes more intimate and work on their relationship before even more unwanted guests arrive.
The dialogue was a bit corny at times, but worked overall. I enjoyed the fresh take on the zombie genre. If romantic comedy zombie horror is a new sub genre I'm all in.
Darren (1599 KP) rated From Dusk Till Dawn: Texas Blood Money (1999) in Movies
Sep 2, 2019
Thoughts on From Dusk till Dawn 2 Blood Money
Characters – Buck is a thieve that has claimed to have gone clean after his recent stint in prison, the cops do still watch him, only now he gets a chance at a new job which will see him put his crew together, he has a way to work with his men, well that is about it, his character doesn’t have much more to him, Sheriff Otis Lawson has been waiting for Buck to make a mistake for years now, using the latest former member of his crew as hope that he could catch him in the act once again. Luther is the one that brings the job to Buck, only on his way back to the crew, he ends up at the Titty Twister grabbing the attention of the vampires, looking for spread the curse to a new selection of victims. C.W. is another member of the crew and just like the rest they don’t get much to make them stand out.
Performances – Robert Patrick does try to make the most of his character only he doesn’t get anything to work with here. This is the big problem for the rest of the cast, nobody gets a chance to make anything from their characters who all end up being painful bland.
Story – The story follows a group of criminals that are looking to head to Mexico for their latest job, only to attract the attention of the vampires using the Titty Twister becoming the latest target, can they survive the night? The story here is very weak, we get five criminals with little to no character development, not making us care about what is happening. We get thrown into another direction with the story which doesn’t help because we know what is happening, while certain members of the crew don’t, this does against what we learnt about the vampires in the first film. this story just feels like a forced sequel nobody really asked for.
Crime/Horror – The crime side of this horror comes from seeing just how the crew is operating, how they plan to get the job done, the horror comes from the vampire side of the film, it does have darker moments, only it still doesn’t feel like a scarier film.
Settings – The film is set between Mexico and Texas, no location involved does make us feel like we are in iconic location the first one did.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are not at the same standard either, with most of the attacks being from bats which seem to be extreme close ups that just feel too difficult to watch.
Scene of the Movie – A helping hand?
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The lack of interest around the characters.
Final Thoughts – This is a disappoint sequel that pulls the quality level right down to just a basic sequel that just so happens to visit the same bar, having no connection to the previous film.
Overall: Bland sequel.
Characters – Buck is a thieve that has claimed to have gone clean after his recent stint in prison, the cops do still watch him, only now he gets a chance at a new job which will see him put his crew together, he has a way to work with his men, well that is about it, his character doesn’t have much more to him, Sheriff Otis Lawson has been waiting for Buck to make a mistake for years now, using the latest former member of his crew as hope that he could catch him in the act once again. Luther is the one that brings the job to Buck, only on his way back to the crew, he ends up at the Titty Twister grabbing the attention of the vampires, looking for spread the curse to a new selection of victims. C.W. is another member of the crew and just like the rest they don’t get much to make them stand out.
Performances – Robert Patrick does try to make the most of his character only he doesn’t get anything to work with here. This is the big problem for the rest of the cast, nobody gets a chance to make anything from their characters who all end up being painful bland.
Story – The story follows a group of criminals that are looking to head to Mexico for their latest job, only to attract the attention of the vampires using the Titty Twister becoming the latest target, can they survive the night? The story here is very weak, we get five criminals with little to no character development, not making us care about what is happening. We get thrown into another direction with the story which doesn’t help because we know what is happening, while certain members of the crew don’t, this does against what we learnt about the vampires in the first film. this story just feels like a forced sequel nobody really asked for.
Crime/Horror – The crime side of this horror comes from seeing just how the crew is operating, how they plan to get the job done, the horror comes from the vampire side of the film, it does have darker moments, only it still doesn’t feel like a scarier film.
Settings – The film is set between Mexico and Texas, no location involved does make us feel like we are in iconic location the first one did.
Special Effects – The effects in the film are not at the same standard either, with most of the attacks being from bats which seem to be extreme close ups that just feel too difficult to watch.
Scene of the Movie – A helping hand?
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The lack of interest around the characters.
Final Thoughts – This is a disappoint sequel that pulls the quality level right down to just a basic sequel that just so happens to visit the same bar, having no connection to the previous film.
Overall: Bland sequel.
JT (287 KP) rated Chernobyl Diaries (2012) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
The problem with the horror genre these days is its becoming far too predictable, you almost spend the majority of the film second guessing the writers as to what is going to happen next. This is exactly what happened to me when I watched Chernobyl Diaries.
The premise in itself sounded good, a group of tourists/friends travelling the globe decide upon a little bit of extreme tourism and take a venture out to the site of the Chernobyl disaster.
Finding a picnic spot wasn’t going to be a problem
In particular they head to the city of Pripyat which has become a desolate ghost town since its inhabitants had to drop everything and leave in a hurry, something about a nuclear disaster.
The location provides an eerie setting, empty desolate buildings are submerged by overgrown trees giving off a sinister mood. The group, after getting refused entry by the guards take a back road inside, and spend time wandering about. When the van they are travelling in fails to start they have to spend the night and try to locate a way back out.
Oren Peli wrote the screenplay, but still seems to be living off the success of his debut chiller Paranormal Activity as he reuses the same horror clichés that we have seen too often in the past. Children wandering about aimlessly and shadows in the dark are all present in this, as well as a group of humanoids who give off a similar feel to that in The Descent.
That isn’t too say the film doesn’t have its good points (although rare), and there are some brief moments of tension. But the resulting final act in which the remainder of the party run haplessly about being chased by some unwelcome guests is poor. Slamming doors here, screaming there does little to satisfy the imagination.
The ending falls flat but you could see it coming, if only more had been done to elaborate on the back story it might have given the overall plot a bit more credibility. This was Bradley Parker’s debut directorial role after cutting his teeth in visual effects through-out his career.
While he might have done a credible job with some aspects of this film visually, once again he becomes another director in a long line who fail to deliver on tension and suspense.
The premise in itself sounded good, a group of tourists/friends travelling the globe decide upon a little bit of extreme tourism and take a venture out to the site of the Chernobyl disaster.
Finding a picnic spot wasn’t going to be a problem
In particular they head to the city of Pripyat which has become a desolate ghost town since its inhabitants had to drop everything and leave in a hurry, something about a nuclear disaster.
The location provides an eerie setting, empty desolate buildings are submerged by overgrown trees giving off a sinister mood. The group, after getting refused entry by the guards take a back road inside, and spend time wandering about. When the van they are travelling in fails to start they have to spend the night and try to locate a way back out.
Oren Peli wrote the screenplay, but still seems to be living off the success of his debut chiller Paranormal Activity as he reuses the same horror clichés that we have seen too often in the past. Children wandering about aimlessly and shadows in the dark are all present in this, as well as a group of humanoids who give off a similar feel to that in The Descent.
That isn’t too say the film doesn’t have its good points (although rare), and there are some brief moments of tension. But the resulting final act in which the remainder of the party run haplessly about being chased by some unwelcome guests is poor. Slamming doors here, screaming there does little to satisfy the imagination.
The ending falls flat but you could see it coming, if only more had been done to elaborate on the back story it might have given the overall plot a bit more credibility. This was Bradley Parker’s debut directorial role after cutting his teeth in visual effects through-out his career.
While he might have done a credible job with some aspects of this film visually, once again he becomes another director in a long line who fail to deliver on tension and suspense.
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Black Hawk Down (2001) in Movies
Feb 18, 2019
Modern Warfare like we had never seen it before...
Black Hawk Down is to me, the best war film that I have ever seen. Intense and relentless, it conveys the horror and tactics of modern warfare and more to point, like all great and classic war movies, demonstrates the dedication, skill and spirit that warfare can manifest when all hell breaks loose, or the proverbial hits the fan!
As a launch pad for some many careers in the naughties and beyond, including Tom Hardy, this is well cast, directed, edited, with an effective Hans Zimmer score and some of the best sound design I have ever heard, the engrossing horror of the situation was conveyed brilliantly. But there is something that I find somewhat disturbing about this film and it may well be a failure but it does demonstrate the effectiveness of the medium;
The Somalians or the “Indigenous Personal” as they were so aptly referred to in the film, came across as heartless, rage filled amoral murderers and while in many respects in respects to those portrayed in the film, it may well be true, I found myself and I doubt that I was alone, being filled with sense of glee every time one of these bastards was blown to pieces or filled with a hail of Uncle Sam’s bullets!
Also the scene where a child accidentally guns down his own father after a U.S. troop slips, is so very telling of the militia culture in that country at that time. Are we supposed to feel sorry for the Man? The Child? Or see it a poetic justice? Or just be relieved that our “Peace Keeping” U.S. soldier got away with his life? In many ways, I think that the ambivalence if that scene, sums up what was so brilliant as well as frightening about this film.
Whilst on one hand, it is hard to deny that we are supposed to feel for, respect and support our American heroes who will go to extreme lengths to “Leave No Man Behind”, we are asked to look at why the Somalians have taken up arms? But in the end it is a huge sociological issue and this film does not dwell too much on that. It touches on the fact that there are always two sides to any conflict, but like Zulu (1960) forty years before it, it chose its side and that was the normally powerful under dog and we saw them survive what many of us would have struggled to do.
This is truly a war film for war film fans and a MUST SEE for everyone.
As a launch pad for some many careers in the naughties and beyond, including Tom Hardy, this is well cast, directed, edited, with an effective Hans Zimmer score and some of the best sound design I have ever heard, the engrossing horror of the situation was conveyed brilliantly. But there is something that I find somewhat disturbing about this film and it may well be a failure but it does demonstrate the effectiveness of the medium;
The Somalians or the “Indigenous Personal” as they were so aptly referred to in the film, came across as heartless, rage filled amoral murderers and while in many respects in respects to those portrayed in the film, it may well be true, I found myself and I doubt that I was alone, being filled with sense of glee every time one of these bastards was blown to pieces or filled with a hail of Uncle Sam’s bullets!
Also the scene where a child accidentally guns down his own father after a U.S. troop slips, is so very telling of the militia culture in that country at that time. Are we supposed to feel sorry for the Man? The Child? Or see it a poetic justice? Or just be relieved that our “Peace Keeping” U.S. soldier got away with his life? In many ways, I think that the ambivalence if that scene, sums up what was so brilliant as well as frightening about this film.
Whilst on one hand, it is hard to deny that we are supposed to feel for, respect and support our American heroes who will go to extreme lengths to “Leave No Man Behind”, we are asked to look at why the Somalians have taken up arms? But in the end it is a huge sociological issue and this film does not dwell too much on that. It touches on the fact that there are always two sides to any conflict, but like Zulu (1960) forty years before it, it chose its side and that was the normally powerful under dog and we saw them survive what many of us would have struggled to do.
This is truly a war film for war film fans and a MUST SEE for everyone.
5 Minute Movie Guy (379 KP) rated Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (2019) in Movies
Sep 16, 2019
In the early 1980s, author Alvin Schwartz created a book of short horror stories titled Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark that would go on to terrorize a whole generation of curious young readers. Combined with its morbid and ghastly illustrations by artist Stephen Gammell, the book would serve as an introduction to horror for many. Over the next ten years, Schwartz wrote two more books in the Scary Stories series, and now, nearly forty years later, it has finally been adapted into a major motion picture. Produced by Academy Award-winning director Guillermo Del Toro and directed by André Øvredal, the Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark film constructs a new narrative around several of the iconic short stories from the book series, and brings them to life to haunt the movie’s teenage characters.
In Mill Valley, Pennsylvania in 1968, a group of teenage friends fleeing from a band of bullies hide out in an abandoned haunted house on Halloween night. They know the story of this house well, whose folklore is rooted in the origins of their own small town. It was once owned by the wealthy Bellows Family, who according to urban legend, locked away their own daughter, Sarah Bellows, inside the cellar of their home. Sarah had been accused of killing the town’s children, and so her family kept her hidden away and attempted to erase her from existence, even removing her from their own family portraits. According to legend, Sarah wrote a book of horror stories and would read them aloud through the walls of her room to frighten the local townspeople.
While inside this haunted house, our group of protagonists; Stella (Zoe Colletti), Ramón (Michael Garza), Auggie (Gabriel Rush), and Chuck (Austin Zajur), discover the room Sarah had spent her life trapped in. Stella, an amateur horror writer herself, finds the rumored book that was written by Sarah. Upon opening it she sees that a new page is somehow being written in blood right before her very eyes, and it happens to be about the bully that chased them into the house. The next day, they realize that it seems as though the story actually came true, and that the book itself may be haunted. This establishes the basic premise of the film, in which new stories are being written in the book and they appear to be targeting Stella and everyone else that entered the Bellows’ house that night.
It’s an interesting set-up that cleverly mixes horror with mystery, as the characters are not only trying to survive these stories as they come to life, but are also trying to figure out how to stop them from happening. The film features five different stories from the series, most of which come from the third and final book, and a sixth story centered around Stella and Sarah Bellows that is at least in part inspired by one of the original tales. To give an example without giving too much away, one story for instance, involves a haunted scarecrow, whereas another is about a walking corpse in search of its severed big toe. The stories themselves are much more dark and grotesque than I had anticipated. I was expecting something more along the lines of Goosebumps, which was a series of children’s horror books that I personally loved and grew up with as a child, but these are much more disturbing than that. While I only found the first story of the film, “Harold”, to actually be scary, I do imagine this movie might be a little too frightening for some teenagers.
I should clarify that I’m not familiar with the original written source material of Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, and I had truthfully never even heard of the books prior to the movie’s announcement. I don’t have any personal stake in these stories, but I do admire the thoughtfulness and creativity that went into building the film around them. I thought the film started out really strong with a likable cast of characters, and with most of its best moments featured early on. I loved the introduction to the haunted house and the legend of the Bellows Family. I enjoyed the playful nature of our group of young protagonists, who in the beginning felt reminiscent of the fun and crazy kids you might find in an 80s movie like The Goonies. Additionally, I liked the mystery of Sarah Bellows that the kids were trying to uncover, all the while struggling to survive the dangers of her haunting stories that had come to life.
Unfortunately, as the movie went on, I found myself less and less invested in it with each passing story, all of which I would argue are weaker than the previous one before it. The Pale Lady storyline was particularly dull and underwhelming. The final act itself, although smartly designed with its use of parallels, wound up feeling poorly executed and unsatisfying overall.
Similarly, in regards to the acting, I liked the performances even less by the end as well. Early on I had been impressed with Zoe Colletti as Stella, but I found her to be annoying in the later parts of the movie. The same goes for Austin Zajur as Chuck. The cast for the most part was decent, but everything about the movie began to drop in quality as it dragged on, which is especially unfortunate given how well it starts out.
The special effects are mostly quite good and adequately disturbing, but on the same token, I wish they were more clearly visible at times. A lot of the horror settings take place in dark rooms, so at times it can be hard to see the monsters with much clarity. Still, I love the design of Harold the Scarecrow, as well as The Jangly Man, who is played by contortionist Troy James whose extreme flexibility allows the character to move in unnatural and disturbing looking ways.
To conclude, I’m left with some mixed feelings on Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark. For me, it almost hits the mark, but unfortunately it isn’t a movie that I think I’d bother to watch again. It made a solid first impression with its rich atmosphere and creepy first act, but it failed to maintain its momentum and level of quality. In the end, my favorite thing about the whole movie is actually the excellent cover song of “Season of the Witch” by Lana Del Rey that plays during the credits. However that’s not in any way to say the movie is so bad that the credits were my favorite part. It’s just a great song by an artist I very much enjoy. If you grew up with the Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark series, then by all means, I recommend that you at least check it out. If you like horror and have any troublesome teenaged kids, this may be a perfect opportunity to have some fun scaring the heck out of them.
In Mill Valley, Pennsylvania in 1968, a group of teenage friends fleeing from a band of bullies hide out in an abandoned haunted house on Halloween night. They know the story of this house well, whose folklore is rooted in the origins of their own small town. It was once owned by the wealthy Bellows Family, who according to urban legend, locked away their own daughter, Sarah Bellows, inside the cellar of their home. Sarah had been accused of killing the town’s children, and so her family kept her hidden away and attempted to erase her from existence, even removing her from their own family portraits. According to legend, Sarah wrote a book of horror stories and would read them aloud through the walls of her room to frighten the local townspeople.
While inside this haunted house, our group of protagonists; Stella (Zoe Colletti), Ramón (Michael Garza), Auggie (Gabriel Rush), and Chuck (Austin Zajur), discover the room Sarah had spent her life trapped in. Stella, an amateur horror writer herself, finds the rumored book that was written by Sarah. Upon opening it she sees that a new page is somehow being written in blood right before her very eyes, and it happens to be about the bully that chased them into the house. The next day, they realize that it seems as though the story actually came true, and that the book itself may be haunted. This establishes the basic premise of the film, in which new stories are being written in the book and they appear to be targeting Stella and everyone else that entered the Bellows’ house that night.
It’s an interesting set-up that cleverly mixes horror with mystery, as the characters are not only trying to survive these stories as they come to life, but are also trying to figure out how to stop them from happening. The film features five different stories from the series, most of which come from the third and final book, and a sixth story centered around Stella and Sarah Bellows that is at least in part inspired by one of the original tales. To give an example without giving too much away, one story for instance, involves a haunted scarecrow, whereas another is about a walking corpse in search of its severed big toe. The stories themselves are much more dark and grotesque than I had anticipated. I was expecting something more along the lines of Goosebumps, which was a series of children’s horror books that I personally loved and grew up with as a child, but these are much more disturbing than that. While I only found the first story of the film, “Harold”, to actually be scary, I do imagine this movie might be a little too frightening for some teenagers.
I should clarify that I’m not familiar with the original written source material of Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, and I had truthfully never even heard of the books prior to the movie’s announcement. I don’t have any personal stake in these stories, but I do admire the thoughtfulness and creativity that went into building the film around them. I thought the film started out really strong with a likable cast of characters, and with most of its best moments featured early on. I loved the introduction to the haunted house and the legend of the Bellows Family. I enjoyed the playful nature of our group of young protagonists, who in the beginning felt reminiscent of the fun and crazy kids you might find in an 80s movie like The Goonies. Additionally, I liked the mystery of Sarah Bellows that the kids were trying to uncover, all the while struggling to survive the dangers of her haunting stories that had come to life.
Unfortunately, as the movie went on, I found myself less and less invested in it with each passing story, all of which I would argue are weaker than the previous one before it. The Pale Lady storyline was particularly dull and underwhelming. The final act itself, although smartly designed with its use of parallels, wound up feeling poorly executed and unsatisfying overall.
Similarly, in regards to the acting, I liked the performances even less by the end as well. Early on I had been impressed with Zoe Colletti as Stella, but I found her to be annoying in the later parts of the movie. The same goes for Austin Zajur as Chuck. The cast for the most part was decent, but everything about the movie began to drop in quality as it dragged on, which is especially unfortunate given how well it starts out.
The special effects are mostly quite good and adequately disturbing, but on the same token, I wish they were more clearly visible at times. A lot of the horror settings take place in dark rooms, so at times it can be hard to see the monsters with much clarity. Still, I love the design of Harold the Scarecrow, as well as The Jangly Man, who is played by contortionist Troy James whose extreme flexibility allows the character to move in unnatural and disturbing looking ways.
To conclude, I’m left with some mixed feelings on Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark. For me, it almost hits the mark, but unfortunately it isn’t a movie that I think I’d bother to watch again. It made a solid first impression with its rich atmosphere and creepy first act, but it failed to maintain its momentum and level of quality. In the end, my favorite thing about the whole movie is actually the excellent cover song of “Season of the Witch” by Lana Del Rey that plays during the credits. However that’s not in any way to say the movie is so bad that the credits were my favorite part. It’s just a great song by an artist I very much enjoy. If you grew up with the Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark series, then by all means, I recommend that you at least check it out. If you like horror and have any troublesome teenaged kids, this may be a perfect opportunity to have some fun scaring the heck out of them.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Brightburn (2019) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Sep 25, 2019)
Superheroes and villains are a subject close to my heart, I enjoy speculating on the good and bad potential of superpowers, so to have the bad Superman story laid out like this is very interesting to experience.
Having a bad Superman would have been good, but switching it to a child automatically knocks the "scary" up a notch, something we saw earlier in the year in The Prodigy.
Tori and Kyle Breyer are desperately trying to have a baby, their lives start to revolve around the idea when one night the Earth literally moves for them and a meteor hits their farm. Ten years later and Tori and Kyle have their adopted son, Brandon, but growing up comes with some unexpected twists.
Brightburn's trailer makes it very clear that what we're going to see is a Superman-style childhood but the film is actually not so blatant. In fact, everything about the pre-release information tells you exactly what you're going to get while the film alone actually leaves it to your imagination. You have to make assumptions and educated guesses about what's going to happen. It's a bit of a shame that there's really no successful way to advertise this film without pointing out the obvious.
Elizabeth Banks (eternally young and possibly getting younger) plays Tori, Brandon's mum. The terror she gets across while still retaining a mother's love is spot on and great to watch on screen. In particular there's a scene where she discovers Brandon's notebook and the way she reacts made me react, and twisting that scene with the side story of Brandon and his dad was so effective.
I have one fault when it comes to horror, and that's that I can't take it seriously, luckily lots of people in my screening felt the same way too. While there were a couple of moments that went for actual humour I found myself laughing at some of the gore too. It was the same reaction as I get from extreme action scenes, an extended "oooooooh!" with a slight wince and then laughing. I can't help it, it's just funny.
Brightburn is probably an easier horror to see as the scary moments are mostly predictable so you could close your eyes in time for the bad bits if you wanted too, a lot are prefixed with something ominous in the background to prepare you.
One moment that made me jump was actually not a scary piece, it was the moment Brandon realises he's different. You already know part of his discovery if you've seen the trailer and yet again this film then tweaks that moment to give you something a little different.
The way they use light and dark is great because it allows things to creep up on you, quite literally, and highlights the evil that is starting to permeate the town.
It surprises me that I enjoyed this one as much as I did. I think the action moments probably holds up a lot of it. I like the idea, but I'm not convinced that it was created as well as it could have been. I was impressed that they didn't step back from the violent moments though, Brightburn is ballsy, and I like it for that.
[Note: Stay to see some clips into the credits.]
What you should do
If you like horror then I think it's a fairly good offering to see, it's probably also a good crossover if you're more into superheroes.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'd love the aunt's house but without the creepy added extras.
Having a bad Superman would have been good, but switching it to a child automatically knocks the "scary" up a notch, something we saw earlier in the year in The Prodigy.
Tori and Kyle Breyer are desperately trying to have a baby, their lives start to revolve around the idea when one night the Earth literally moves for them and a meteor hits their farm. Ten years later and Tori and Kyle have their adopted son, Brandon, but growing up comes with some unexpected twists.
Brightburn's trailer makes it very clear that what we're going to see is a Superman-style childhood but the film is actually not so blatant. In fact, everything about the pre-release information tells you exactly what you're going to get while the film alone actually leaves it to your imagination. You have to make assumptions and educated guesses about what's going to happen. It's a bit of a shame that there's really no successful way to advertise this film without pointing out the obvious.
Elizabeth Banks (eternally young and possibly getting younger) plays Tori, Brandon's mum. The terror she gets across while still retaining a mother's love is spot on and great to watch on screen. In particular there's a scene where she discovers Brandon's notebook and the way she reacts made me react, and twisting that scene with the side story of Brandon and his dad was so effective.
I have one fault when it comes to horror, and that's that I can't take it seriously, luckily lots of people in my screening felt the same way too. While there were a couple of moments that went for actual humour I found myself laughing at some of the gore too. It was the same reaction as I get from extreme action scenes, an extended "oooooooh!" with a slight wince and then laughing. I can't help it, it's just funny.
Brightburn is probably an easier horror to see as the scary moments are mostly predictable so you could close your eyes in time for the bad bits if you wanted too, a lot are prefixed with something ominous in the background to prepare you.
One moment that made me jump was actually not a scary piece, it was the moment Brandon realises he's different. You already know part of his discovery if you've seen the trailer and yet again this film then tweaks that moment to give you something a little different.
The way they use light and dark is great because it allows things to creep up on you, quite literally, and highlights the evil that is starting to permeate the town.
It surprises me that I enjoyed this one as much as I did. I think the action moments probably holds up a lot of it. I like the idea, but I'm not convinced that it was created as well as it could have been. I was impressed that they didn't step back from the violent moments though, Brightburn is ballsy, and I like it for that.
[Note: Stay to see some clips into the credits.]
What you should do
If you like horror then I think it's a fairly good offering to see, it's probably also a good crossover if you're more into superheroes.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
I'd love the aunt's house but without the creepy added extras.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Chernobyl Diaries (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
What do you get when you pair the director of “Paranormal Activity” with a handful of unknown actors, a one-hit wonder soap-star-turned-singer, and a plot based upon the Chernobyl meltdown? You guessed it: a sub-par suspense film with a poorly executed ending.
Meet Chris, Amanda, and Natalie – a trio of pretty Americans touring Europe and en route to Russia to meet Chris’ older brother, Paul, in Minsk. Unbeknownst to Amanda, Chris confides in his older brother his plan to propose to her upon their arrival in Moscow, their next destination. However, Paul decides to intervene and proposes a new plan: an extreme tourism excursion in the abandoned city of Pripyat, just outside of the Chernobyl nuclear plant. Despite Chris’ pleas, the group decides to take up Paul’s offer and embark the next day to Chernobyl/Pripyat under the guide of Uri, an ex-Soviet Special Forces agent.
Piling into an assault-van of sorts and accompanied by a pair of last minute travelers – an Aussie named Mike and his blonde Norse girlfriend, Zoe – they set off on the 2-hour drive to Pripyat. However, it is upon arrival at their destination that they find the area restricted to tourists by the Soviet guard. Undaunted, Uri drives the van to another remote access point, stealing them into the abandoned city of Pripyat for their excursion. It is there, as one can imagine, that some unknown element intercedes and prevents them from leaving the city. Somehow wires to the van’s starter are cut and they are forced to stay overnight. It’s at this point, as you can imagine, the horror movie element sets in and the typical suspense-film-plot takes over.
Of course, people leave the van to investigate “strange noises” and, of course, they are picked off one by one. As the movie progresses and the horror-film starts to settle in, the plot unravels and you’re ultimately left with one of the lamest endings conceived. Basically, you’ve had almost two hour’s worth of build-up and suspense for absolutely nothing.
Suspense-wise, you’re definitely going to jump here and there; my poor date had to suffer through my grabbing his hand and leg on more than one occasion. Acting wise, there’s nothing substantial. Jesse McCartney draws upon his experience as a soap actor for the more emotional role and Devin Kelley who plays Amanda seems more adept at sticking out her chest than acting her way out of a bag. But I digress, horror movies aren’t exactly based on strong acting skills, right?
If you’re looking for a good suspense film, something that gives you an excuse to grab your date’s hand or squeal like a girl, then this is a good film for that. If you’re looking for something twisted, something akin to “The Hills Have Eyes” or “Silent Hill,” then this falls rather short in comparison. The director had so many opportunities to delve further into the Chernobyl mystery and play up the radiation/mutation stab, but failed to provide any substance behind his direction. For my taste, there were too many unanswered questions and vague allusions for me to be wholly impressed with the movie. The premise had a lot of potential and promise but honestly failed to deliver.
Meet Chris, Amanda, and Natalie – a trio of pretty Americans touring Europe and en route to Russia to meet Chris’ older brother, Paul, in Minsk. Unbeknownst to Amanda, Chris confides in his older brother his plan to propose to her upon their arrival in Moscow, their next destination. However, Paul decides to intervene and proposes a new plan: an extreme tourism excursion in the abandoned city of Pripyat, just outside of the Chernobyl nuclear plant. Despite Chris’ pleas, the group decides to take up Paul’s offer and embark the next day to Chernobyl/Pripyat under the guide of Uri, an ex-Soviet Special Forces agent.
Piling into an assault-van of sorts and accompanied by a pair of last minute travelers – an Aussie named Mike and his blonde Norse girlfriend, Zoe – they set off on the 2-hour drive to Pripyat. However, it is upon arrival at their destination that they find the area restricted to tourists by the Soviet guard. Undaunted, Uri drives the van to another remote access point, stealing them into the abandoned city of Pripyat for their excursion. It is there, as one can imagine, that some unknown element intercedes and prevents them from leaving the city. Somehow wires to the van’s starter are cut and they are forced to stay overnight. It’s at this point, as you can imagine, the horror movie element sets in and the typical suspense-film-plot takes over.
Of course, people leave the van to investigate “strange noises” and, of course, they are picked off one by one. As the movie progresses and the horror-film starts to settle in, the plot unravels and you’re ultimately left with one of the lamest endings conceived. Basically, you’ve had almost two hour’s worth of build-up and suspense for absolutely nothing.
Suspense-wise, you’re definitely going to jump here and there; my poor date had to suffer through my grabbing his hand and leg on more than one occasion. Acting wise, there’s nothing substantial. Jesse McCartney draws upon his experience as a soap actor for the more emotional role and Devin Kelley who plays Amanda seems more adept at sticking out her chest than acting her way out of a bag. But I digress, horror movies aren’t exactly based on strong acting skills, right?
If you’re looking for a good suspense film, something that gives you an excuse to grab your date’s hand or squeal like a girl, then this is a good film for that. If you’re looking for something twisted, something akin to “The Hills Have Eyes” or “Silent Hill,” then this falls rather short in comparison. The director had so many opportunities to delve further into the Chernobyl mystery and play up the radiation/mutation stab, but failed to provide any substance behind his direction. For my taste, there were too many unanswered questions and vague allusions for me to be wholly impressed with the movie. The premise had a lot of potential and promise but honestly failed to deliver.