Search
Search results
Let Me In
Ebba Segerberg and John Ajvide Lindqvist
8.4
Rate It
Book
English version translated by Ebba Segerberg. Let Me In Takes Top Honors at Tribeca Film Festival...
Vampire Sweden Let the right one in
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
When I first heard about this movie, I was expecting the worst. I’ve been exposed to my fair share of B-type horror movies (I was raised on “Critters,” “Ghoulies,” “Killer Clowns from Outerspace,” and everything else one can imagine as a kid). I laughed at the SyFy channel’s monster movie line-up and was sick unto death of zombie movies. That said, I wasn’t entirely excited for this movie’s premier. My boyfriend, however, was chomping at the bit. He adores B-type
movies and this was no exception. And, to my honest surprise, it wasn’t as awful as I had wholly envisioned in my head.
The movie starts with a young Abraham Lincoln (Benjamin Walker) defending his slave friend, Will Johnson (Anthony Mackie), from abuse at the hands of a slave trader. A scuffle ensues and Abraham’s father is ultimately met face-to-face with “Adam” (Rufus Sewell), a well-known and well-feared trader in the lands. The two exchange heated words with Adam threatening to extract his revenge by some unknown means. What seems later that evening, Abraham’s mother is attacked by Adam as young Abraham watches from the shadows. Adam, as one can guess, is a vampire and leaves Abraham’s mother in such a state she cannot recover. Upon her death, Abraham vows revenge, devoting the next ten years of his life to killing Adam.
As the reader can surmise, Abraham is ill-equipped to face Adam and when the day finally arrives, he finds himself wholly unprepared for the task. Cue the entrance of Henry Sturgess, Vampire Hunter. Saving Abraham from an early demise, Henry (Dominic Cooper) takes the young man under his wing and teaches him the way of vampire hunting. He teaches young Abe that the vampires control the whole of the south, using the slave trade as their means for fresh and easily accessible blood. Having never tolerated slavery of any kind, Abraham is infuriated by this and his desire to eradicate the vampire colony grows.
From there he is bequeathed his infamous axe, its edge lined in silver, and we watch as young Abe grows and matures as a skilled warrior before our eyes. When the time comes, Abraham is sent away on a mission to kill select vampires in a quiet town, vampires who pose as noted professionals and townspersons during the day. As a rule, Henry cautions Abraham not to make any friends or form any kind of attachments. Of course, it’s at this point he meets Mary Todd and that whole theory goes out the window. In addition to his vampire hunting, he also begins his career in politics and as a renowned orator. Given one’s knowledge of history, we can see where this all leads.
I won’t divulge the whole of the story here – I’m sure you can imagine where it goes and what comes of it. That said, aside from the over-the-top fighting scenes and certain drawn out moments (the horse stampede and train fight immediately come to mind), it wasn’t as awful as I had originally envisioned. The movie is entertaining and still
retains a fair amount of the B-movie cheesiness one hopes for in watching it. Obviously, the storyline is wracked with historical inaccuracies and unlikely moments (really, Abe Lincoln survives a horse being thrown at him?), but it’s a B-movie and I wasn’t expecting perfection.
If you’re looking for something that offers sheer entertainment and nothing further, this is a movie for you then. You won’t be blown away by the acting skills, the special effects are decent enough (don’t pay extra for 3-D though – it was awful), and while the movie feels slow and drags at parts, over-all it’s rather entertaining for what it is.
movies and this was no exception. And, to my honest surprise, it wasn’t as awful as I had wholly envisioned in my head.
The movie starts with a young Abraham Lincoln (Benjamin Walker) defending his slave friend, Will Johnson (Anthony Mackie), from abuse at the hands of a slave trader. A scuffle ensues and Abraham’s father is ultimately met face-to-face with “Adam” (Rufus Sewell), a well-known and well-feared trader in the lands. The two exchange heated words with Adam threatening to extract his revenge by some unknown means. What seems later that evening, Abraham’s mother is attacked by Adam as young Abraham watches from the shadows. Adam, as one can guess, is a vampire and leaves Abraham’s mother in such a state she cannot recover. Upon her death, Abraham vows revenge, devoting the next ten years of his life to killing Adam.
As the reader can surmise, Abraham is ill-equipped to face Adam and when the day finally arrives, he finds himself wholly unprepared for the task. Cue the entrance of Henry Sturgess, Vampire Hunter. Saving Abraham from an early demise, Henry (Dominic Cooper) takes the young man under his wing and teaches him the way of vampire hunting. He teaches young Abe that the vampires control the whole of the south, using the slave trade as their means for fresh and easily accessible blood. Having never tolerated slavery of any kind, Abraham is infuriated by this and his desire to eradicate the vampire colony grows.
From there he is bequeathed his infamous axe, its edge lined in silver, and we watch as young Abe grows and matures as a skilled warrior before our eyes. When the time comes, Abraham is sent away on a mission to kill select vampires in a quiet town, vampires who pose as noted professionals and townspersons during the day. As a rule, Henry cautions Abraham not to make any friends or form any kind of attachments. Of course, it’s at this point he meets Mary Todd and that whole theory goes out the window. In addition to his vampire hunting, he also begins his career in politics and as a renowned orator. Given one’s knowledge of history, we can see where this all leads.
I won’t divulge the whole of the story here – I’m sure you can imagine where it goes and what comes of it. That said, aside from the over-the-top fighting scenes and certain drawn out moments (the horse stampede and train fight immediately come to mind), it wasn’t as awful as I had originally envisioned. The movie is entertaining and still
retains a fair amount of the B-movie cheesiness one hopes for in watching it. Obviously, the storyline is wracked with historical inaccuracies and unlikely moments (really, Abe Lincoln survives a horse being thrown at him?), but it’s a B-movie and I wasn’t expecting perfection.
If you’re looking for something that offers sheer entertainment and nothing further, this is a movie for you then. You won’t be blown away by the acting skills, the special effects are decent enough (don’t pay extra for 3-D though – it was awful), and while the movie feels slow and drags at parts, over-all it’s rather entertaining for what it is.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated The Invisible Man (2020) in Movies
Jan 9, 2021
Elisabeth Moss - excellent performance (1 more)
Slowly creeping tension - clever camera work
Have you seen "The Invisible Man"?
Cecilia Kass (Elisabeth Moss) is trapped in a highly controlling and violent relationship with technology mogul Adrian Griffin (Oliver Jackson-Cohen). Escaping from his fortress-like home, she lives in fear of his retribution. So she is much relieved, if a little surprised, at the report of his suicide. Now living with old friend James Lanier (Aldis Hodge) and his teenage daughter Sydney (Storm Reid), Cecilia can finally start to relax. But as strange things start to happen, is the ghost of Griffin back to haunt her? Or is it really all in her rapidly disintegrating mind, as her sister Emily (Harriet Dyer) and James suspect?
Australian writer/director Leigh Whannell is famous as the writer behind the "Saw" and "Insidious" franchises. So he knows a thing or two about crafting horror movies. And in this Blumhouse production, after a clever attention-grabbing opening, he really takes his time in building an understanding of Cecilia's mental state. When things start to happen, they happen so stealthily that I needed to hit the rewind button a couple of times (no cinema experience for this one I'm afraid). Cinematographer Stefan Duscio keeps slowly panning away from Cecilia across the room to show empty corridors before slowly panning back again. It's superbly effective and was comprehensively creeping me out!
When the set action pieces do occur then they are satisfactorily exciting, albeit wildly implausible. I did not see some of the "Surprises" coming, making them jolt-worthy. And the denouement really delivered for me, reminiscent of Hitchcock's style.
Now most famous for "Mad Men" and "The Handmaids Tale" on TV, Elisabeth Moss has delivered a range of impressive film performances including in "High Rise" and - as most closely related to this role - in "Girl, Interrupted" as mental patient Lisa. It's a star turn, no doubt about it.
This movie was intended by Universal to be part of the "Dark Universe" series. But the Tom Cruise flop "The Mummy" unfortunately put paid to that. Which is a great shame. If they'd started with this one, then they might have had a hit on their hands. With a post-credits "monkey" (there isn't one in this movie by the way) they could have lined up into the follow-up movie and started the ball rolling.
It's a rollicking action flick that had my attention throughout. However, the initial question it poses - haunting, 'all in the mind' or something else - gets clarified a little too early for me (and - note - is spoiled by the trailer), so the movie falls short of being a classic for that reason.
There's one aspect of the movie that really irritated me. And that is that there was no credit whatsoever for the idea of H.G. Wells that originated this story. There's a discussion of that here: since Wells died in 1946, his copyright will have expired on his works 70 years later. This is definitely NOT a retelling of his story, but in reusing the novel's title it would seem at least 'polite' to include a "Based on an idea by H.G. Wells" in the credits somewhere.
All in all, this is still a bit of a B-movie, but its a bloody good one! Utterly preposterous at times, and with decision-making that would feel at home within the Trump presidency, it's an entertaining rollercoaster of a movie. Definitely comes with a "recommended" from me and I'll look forward to a re-watch at some point.
For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/01/09/have-you-seen-the-invisible-man/ .
Australian writer/director Leigh Whannell is famous as the writer behind the "Saw" and "Insidious" franchises. So he knows a thing or two about crafting horror movies. And in this Blumhouse production, after a clever attention-grabbing opening, he really takes his time in building an understanding of Cecilia's mental state. When things start to happen, they happen so stealthily that I needed to hit the rewind button a couple of times (no cinema experience for this one I'm afraid). Cinematographer Stefan Duscio keeps slowly panning away from Cecilia across the room to show empty corridors before slowly panning back again. It's superbly effective and was comprehensively creeping me out!
When the set action pieces do occur then they are satisfactorily exciting, albeit wildly implausible. I did not see some of the "Surprises" coming, making them jolt-worthy. And the denouement really delivered for me, reminiscent of Hitchcock's style.
Now most famous for "Mad Men" and "The Handmaids Tale" on TV, Elisabeth Moss has delivered a range of impressive film performances including in "High Rise" and - as most closely related to this role - in "Girl, Interrupted" as mental patient Lisa. It's a star turn, no doubt about it.
This movie was intended by Universal to be part of the "Dark Universe" series. But the Tom Cruise flop "The Mummy" unfortunately put paid to that. Which is a great shame. If they'd started with this one, then they might have had a hit on their hands. With a post-credits "monkey" (there isn't one in this movie by the way) they could have lined up into the follow-up movie and started the ball rolling.
It's a rollicking action flick that had my attention throughout. However, the initial question it poses - haunting, 'all in the mind' or something else - gets clarified a little too early for me (and - note - is spoiled by the trailer), so the movie falls short of being a classic for that reason.
There's one aspect of the movie that really irritated me. And that is that there was no credit whatsoever for the idea of H.G. Wells that originated this story. There's a discussion of that here: since Wells died in 1946, his copyright will have expired on his works 70 years later. This is definitely NOT a retelling of his story, but in reusing the novel's title it would seem at least 'polite' to include a "Based on an idea by H.G. Wells" in the credits somewhere.
All in all, this is still a bit of a B-movie, but its a bloody good one! Utterly preposterous at times, and with decision-making that would feel at home within the Trump presidency, it's an entertaining rollercoaster of a movie. Definitely comes with a "recommended" from me and I'll look forward to a re-watch at some point.
For the full graphical review, please check out the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2021/01/09/have-you-seen-the-invisible-man/ .
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Banana Splits Movie (2019) in Movies
Jan 3, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Banana Splits Movie
Isn’t it nice when a network tries to reboot an old children’s favourite? It seems to be happening a lot these days with Netflix reviving Voltron, She-Ra and the Dark Crystal. They have taken a different approach with the Banana Splits though. The starting premise is that the Banana Splits show was never cancelled and, for his ninth birthday Harley is taken to a live filming of the show. Drooper, Fleegle, Snorky and Bingo are all there but the actors have been replaced with animatronics and they have three human friends they interact with (Paige, Stevie and Thadd). The show is still the same as when it first started way back in the 1960s with silly sketches, fun catchphrases and an assault course for the kids although the show has gathered a cult following (as it would in real life) and half the audience are adults.
As the live filming gets under way the actors are informed that this will be the final show as the network has cancelled it, this news is met with mixed reactions from the crew. The Banana splits however only have one reaction, they are programmed that ‘The Show Must Go On’ so, during the back stage tour they begin to make sure that it will never stop. They kidnap all the children, after all the show will always need an audience, and they start to kill or torture all the adults.
Yes, that’s right, someone took a beloved children’s show and added a splash of the ‘Child's Play’ remake and a whole ton of ‘Five Nights At Freddy’s’. To be clear this is a horror/slasher that’s rated 18 (R rated in the USA) that features a group of 60’s children’s characters going on a killing spree because their show got cancelled. It’s campy, it’s dark, it actually builds up to the kills and it has some really good characters and scenes, I especially like Poppy’s story line.
So, we have a film based on a 60’s children’s series that’s been turned into a horror whilst still sticking to its roots that is defiantly not for kids and isn’t a total pile of rubbish.
As a side note I did read that the Banana Splits movie came about because Warner Bros wanted to make a ‘Five Nights At Freddie’s’ movie but they couldn’t get the rights so they made this. not sure how true it is but there are similarities.
Isn’t it nice when a network tries to reboot an old children’s favourite? It seems to be happening a lot these days with Netflix reviving Voltron, She-Ra and the Dark Crystal. They have taken a different approach with the Banana Splits though. The starting premise is that the Banana Splits show was never cancelled and, for his ninth birthday Harley is taken to a live filming of the show. Drooper, Fleegle, Snorky and Bingo are all there but the actors have been replaced with animatronics and they have three human friends they interact with (Paige, Stevie and Thadd). The show is still the same as when it first started way back in the 1960s with silly sketches, fun catchphrases and an assault course for the kids although the show has gathered a cult following (as it would in real life) and half the audience are adults.
As the live filming gets under way the actors are informed that this will be the final show as the network has cancelled it, this news is met with mixed reactions from the crew. The Banana splits however only have one reaction, they are programmed that ‘The Show Must Go On’ so, during the back stage tour they begin to make sure that it will never stop. They kidnap all the children, after all the show will always need an audience, and they start to kill or torture all the adults.
Yes, that’s right, someone took a beloved children’s show and added a splash of the ‘Child's Play’ remake and a whole ton of ‘Five Nights At Freddy’s’. To be clear this is a horror/slasher that’s rated 18 (R rated in the USA) that features a group of 60’s children’s characters going on a killing spree because their show got cancelled. It’s campy, it’s dark, it actually builds up to the kills and it has some really good characters and scenes, I especially like Poppy’s story line.
So, we have a film based on a 60’s children’s series that’s been turned into a horror whilst still sticking to its roots that is defiantly not for kids and isn’t a total pile of rubbish.
As a side note I did read that the Banana Splits movie came about because Warner Bros wanted to make a ‘Five Nights At Freddie’s’ movie but they couldn’t get the rights so they made this. not sure how true it is but there are similarities.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Pet Sematary (2019) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020 (Updated Nov 1, 2020)
A Really Good Remake
Pet Semetary is a 2019 supernatural horror movie directed by Kevin Kolsch and Dennis Widmyer. The movie was written by Jeff Buhler with screen story by Matt Greenberg. It is a remake/reboot of the original 1989 film adaptation of the 1983 Stephen King novel. Starring Jason Clarke, Amy Seimetz, and John Lithgow.
Moving to the small town of Ludlow, Maine with his family: wife, Rachel (Amy Seimetz), children, Ellie (Jete Laurence) and Gage (Hugo & Lucas Lavoie), and Church, Ellie's cat, Louis Creed takes a job at the university's hospital. Ellie stumbles upon a procession of children, while exploring the nearby woods of their new home, who are taking a dead dog to a pet cemetery. Their neighbor, Jud Crandall (John Lithgow), finds Ellie climbing a large stack of branches forming a wall and warns Rachel and Ellie not to venture out alone as the woods can be dangerous.. The following day, Louis fails to save a student Victor Pascow (Obssa Ahmed) fatally injured from a car accident, and is left shaken. That night Louis meets Pascow in a vivid dream, where he is lead to the pet cemetery and warned not to "venture beyond". When Louis awakens he is disturbed to find his bed sheets and feet, muddy and dirty suggesting his "vision" could be more than just a bad dream.
As far as remakes go this one was really good. Especially for the horror genre. I mean I can't tell you how many remakes/reboots I've seen that just bomb and don't do the original justice. This one however seemed to keep the original in mind, while still making changes to keep it fresh and relatively different. That being said I do feel it was a bit over-hyped and didn't live up to certain expectations. To me it was a very creepy movie and had me wanting to cover my eyes in one part as memories from the original played back in my head. The sounds of the character Rachel's sister calling out to her got goosebumps on my forearms. Those parts were very unsettling to me but I didn't feel enough was "scary". I really enjoyed the twists and changes or differences from the original. They were welcome and kept it from being an exact replica and a copy of the original. As another critic stated, Jeffrey M. Anderson-Common Sense Media, the film was "...effectively unsettling, focusing on the characters and their understandable emotions rather than on overt gore and FX." I give it a 7/10.
Moving to the small town of Ludlow, Maine with his family: wife, Rachel (Amy Seimetz), children, Ellie (Jete Laurence) and Gage (Hugo & Lucas Lavoie), and Church, Ellie's cat, Louis Creed takes a job at the university's hospital. Ellie stumbles upon a procession of children, while exploring the nearby woods of their new home, who are taking a dead dog to a pet cemetery. Their neighbor, Jud Crandall (John Lithgow), finds Ellie climbing a large stack of branches forming a wall and warns Rachel and Ellie not to venture out alone as the woods can be dangerous.. The following day, Louis fails to save a student Victor Pascow (Obssa Ahmed) fatally injured from a car accident, and is left shaken. That night Louis meets Pascow in a vivid dream, where he is lead to the pet cemetery and warned not to "venture beyond". When Louis awakens he is disturbed to find his bed sheets and feet, muddy and dirty suggesting his "vision" could be more than just a bad dream.
As far as remakes go this one was really good. Especially for the horror genre. I mean I can't tell you how many remakes/reboots I've seen that just bomb and don't do the original justice. This one however seemed to keep the original in mind, while still making changes to keep it fresh and relatively different. That being said I do feel it was a bit over-hyped and didn't live up to certain expectations. To me it was a very creepy movie and had me wanting to cover my eyes in one part as memories from the original played back in my head. The sounds of the character Rachel's sister calling out to her got goosebumps on my forearms. Those parts were very unsettling to me but I didn't feel enough was "scary". I really enjoyed the twists and changes or differences from the original. They were welcome and kept it from being an exact replica and a copy of the original. As another critic stated, Jeffrey M. Anderson-Common Sense Media, the film was "...effectively unsettling, focusing on the characters and their understandable emotions rather than on overt gore and FX." I give it a 7/10.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Jennifer's Body (2009) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
Devil's Kettle is a small town where everyone knows everybody. The story revolves around the relationship between Needy (Amanda Seyfried) and Jennifer (Megan Fox) and other than having similar interests, the two are polar opposites. Needy is more of the quiet, girl next door type that is a bit of a bookworm with a heart of gold whereas Jennifer is more spontaneous, mean spirited, and the stuck-up, hot cheerleader type that every high school boy seems to dream about being with. One night, Jennifer drags Needy to Melody Lane, the one bar in town, to see a new flavor of the week indie band called Low Shoulder. When the bar catches on fire and most of the people inside are crushed or burned in the destruction, Needy thinks that's where this horrible night gone wrong would end. That is until Jennifer decides to go off with the band in their van and Needy has to make her way back home alone. After that night, a demon is transferred into Jennifer's body with an unquenchable hunger for high school guys. As Needy begins to accept what's happened to her BFF, she realizes that she's the only one that has a chance of stopping Jennifer once and for all.
Other than Megan Fox, the other factor that was pushed really hard in the advertising campaign for Jennifer's Body was the fact that Diablo Cody, the screenwriter for Juno, was attached to this film. To be honest, I think Cody's contributions are what I enjoyed most. The dialogue and humor of the film are both witty and laugh out loud funny at times. The writing, in general, made what otherwise would have been your average horror film worth watching and fairly entertaining in the long run.
This is probably the best we've seen acting-wise when it comes to Megan Fox. She isn't much other than eye candy in the Transformers films and was just an egotistical tramp that just so happened to be a rising star in How To Lose Friends and Alienate People. Other than the demonic possession part, her role in Jennifer's Body isn't too different from her role in How To Lose Friends and Alienate People. I'd give most of the credit to Cody's great writing, but Fox is actually able to display a bit more of her acting range this time around. While it probably isn't much compared to, you know, actresses with talent and she sounds like she has a cold most of the time, it's more than what we've seen from the actress in the past and everyone has to start somewhere.
The storyline doesn't offer much fresh material when it comes to horror films, but it gets the job done. The ending offers a bit of a different take on what would otherwise be an ending that would leave room for a sequel. With the conclusion to Jennifer's Body, however, it's more open ended. They could stop here and it would be a fine stand alone film, but it leaves enough questions unanswered that a sequel could see the light of day. Since the movie only made around $18 million worldwide, a sequel seeing theatrical distribution seems unlikely. A direct to DVD sequel with B-actors is definitely a possibility though. Aren't they always with horror films?
Jennifer's Body is superbly written on one hand, but feels like a run of the mill horror film on the other. The high point is definitely the screenplay by Diablo Cody, who manages to make Megan Fox's acting abilities look better than they ever have. But it seems the films enjoyment will rest solely on the shoulders of how much you enjoy horror films that don't shy away from blood. If you're not a fan of horror, I'd recommend staying away from this one. But if you're a fan of great writing, quite a bit of blood, horror, or Megan Fox's sex appeal then you should definitely give this one a go.
Other than Megan Fox, the other factor that was pushed really hard in the advertising campaign for Jennifer's Body was the fact that Diablo Cody, the screenwriter for Juno, was attached to this film. To be honest, I think Cody's contributions are what I enjoyed most. The dialogue and humor of the film are both witty and laugh out loud funny at times. The writing, in general, made what otherwise would have been your average horror film worth watching and fairly entertaining in the long run.
This is probably the best we've seen acting-wise when it comes to Megan Fox. She isn't much other than eye candy in the Transformers films and was just an egotistical tramp that just so happened to be a rising star in How To Lose Friends and Alienate People. Other than the demonic possession part, her role in Jennifer's Body isn't too different from her role in How To Lose Friends and Alienate People. I'd give most of the credit to Cody's great writing, but Fox is actually able to display a bit more of her acting range this time around. While it probably isn't much compared to, you know, actresses with talent and she sounds like she has a cold most of the time, it's more than what we've seen from the actress in the past and everyone has to start somewhere.
The storyline doesn't offer much fresh material when it comes to horror films, but it gets the job done. The ending offers a bit of a different take on what would otherwise be an ending that would leave room for a sequel. With the conclusion to Jennifer's Body, however, it's more open ended. They could stop here and it would be a fine stand alone film, but it leaves enough questions unanswered that a sequel could see the light of day. Since the movie only made around $18 million worldwide, a sequel seeing theatrical distribution seems unlikely. A direct to DVD sequel with B-actors is definitely a possibility though. Aren't they always with horror films?
Jennifer's Body is superbly written on one hand, but feels like a run of the mill horror film on the other. The high point is definitely the screenplay by Diablo Cody, who manages to make Megan Fox's acting abilities look better than they ever have. But it seems the films enjoyment will rest solely on the shoulders of how much you enjoy horror films that don't shy away from blood. If you're not a fan of horror, I'd recommend staying away from this one. But if you're a fan of great writing, quite a bit of blood, horror, or Megan Fox's sex appeal then you should definitely give this one a go.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Haunting in Connecticut: 2 Ghosts of Georgia (2013) in Movies
Oct 14, 2019
Characters – Lisa is the wife and mother of the family, she does have an ability to see spirits with her mother helping her through these experiences. In her new home she starts to see more spirits that has trying to send her messages and must use her skills to figure out how to save her child. Andy is the husband and father, he is the only one that doesn’t have the ability to see the spirits which shows him taking on the situation as if there would need to be a logical reason behind it all. Heidi is the daughter of the family, that can also see the spirits and it is her visits which guide us to where the story goes this time, she is encouraged by her Auntie and discouraged by her mum. Joyce is the free-spirited Auntie that joins the family, she tries to embrace the idea of the spirits needing help and will guide Heide unlike her sister.
Performances – This is a sequel with no returning cast members, no connection to the original, so the cast is brand new. We do have a couple of known actors from television, Abigail Spencer, Chad Michael Murray and Katee Sackhoff, they do what they can with the material, but the poor decisions they are forced to make doesn’t help. Emily Alyn Lind does well for a child star put in horror situation.
Story – The story is based on real events or sold on this idea anyway. We have the events of the story taking place over short amount of time, as we see how everything seems to escalate, which is fine for a horror story. the idea the sisters and daughter can see spirits naturally is a good spin on the idea where only one can usually see the ghosts. The problems do some into this too as the one person who can’t see the spirits still sees them and most of the decisions being made are poor throughout. For the mystery behind everything it does keep us interested throughout and does give us shocks along the way.
Horror/Mystery – When it comes to the horror in this film we get plenty of the normal jump scares, most of which just play out like you would imagine, the casual fan will jump along the way. The highlight is the mystery behind what is causing the hauntings because history is always filled with surprises.
Settings – The setting for the film is good because it is an old house that is bound to be filled with history that could be a terrifying as what we learn as the film unfolds.
Special Effects – The effects in this film are mixed because the way the flashbacks are shot does look do and feels different to current events, the negatives come from how the injuries can look while inflicted to the modern characters.
Scene of the Movie – Cut the cord.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The moments Andy saw a ghost.
Final Thoughts – This is a solid enough sequel even though it has no connection to the actual first film, it does have smart ideas but terrible character decisions.
Overall: Horror fans should enjoy.
Performances – This is a sequel with no returning cast members, no connection to the original, so the cast is brand new. We do have a couple of known actors from television, Abigail Spencer, Chad Michael Murray and Katee Sackhoff, they do what they can with the material, but the poor decisions they are forced to make doesn’t help. Emily Alyn Lind does well for a child star put in horror situation.
Story – The story is based on real events or sold on this idea anyway. We have the events of the story taking place over short amount of time, as we see how everything seems to escalate, which is fine for a horror story. the idea the sisters and daughter can see spirits naturally is a good spin on the idea where only one can usually see the ghosts. The problems do some into this too as the one person who can’t see the spirits still sees them and most of the decisions being made are poor throughout. For the mystery behind everything it does keep us interested throughout and does give us shocks along the way.
Horror/Mystery – When it comes to the horror in this film we get plenty of the normal jump scares, most of which just play out like you would imagine, the casual fan will jump along the way. The highlight is the mystery behind what is causing the hauntings because history is always filled with surprises.
Settings – The setting for the film is good because it is an old house that is bound to be filled with history that could be a terrifying as what we learn as the film unfolds.
Special Effects – The effects in this film are mixed because the way the flashbacks are shot does look do and feels different to current events, the negatives come from how the injuries can look while inflicted to the modern characters.
Scene of the Movie – Cut the cord.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The moments Andy saw a ghost.
Final Thoughts – This is a solid enough sequel even though it has no connection to the actual first film, it does have smart ideas but terrible character decisions.
Overall: Horror fans should enjoy.
Lee (2222 KP) rated Annabelle Comes Home (2019) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
Enjoyable, not as good as Annabelle Creation
Annabelle Comes Home is the third standalone movie for the creepy looking doll since her introduction during the original Conjuring movie. It's also the seventh feature movie from the ever expanding 'Conjuring Universe', a series of movies that have seen wildly varying degrees of quality and success thus far. I tend to start my reviews for this series of movies by declaring my love for the first Conjuring, before wishing that the latest release I'm reviewing might actually match that. But so far the only other movie in the series to come anywhere close to doing that for me was the last Annabelle movie - Annabelle Creation. So, I had very high hopes for this next Annabelle installment.
After venturing into the past with the previous Annabelle movies, Annabelle Comes Home begins by expanding on the events of The Conjuring. The Warrens take the Annabelle doll into their care in order to keep it safe in their home, under lock and key in their famous artefact room. The car journey home is an eventful one though and it is a real joy to be back in the company of Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga and their portrayal of paranormal investigators, Ed and Lorraine Warren. Their characters, and their performances, have been the most enjoyable aspect of these movies for me and this opening chapter with them gets things off to a great start. With Annabelle in the artefact room, blessed by the local priest and contained in a cabinet made out of chapel glass, the evil is contained. And Annabelle is now home.
From there we shift forward a year, where the focus of the movie turns to the Warren's 10 year old daughter Judy (Mckenna Grace). Her parents occupation and reputation is clearly having an effect on her life, with other children at school poking fun at her and refusing to come to her birthday party at the creepy Warren house. That uncomfortable, uneasy feeling of having a room in your house where unspeakable evil is being contained probably doesn't help things either! When her parents have to go away one night, friendly babysitter Mary Ellen comes over to take care of Judy, stepping in to the role of much needed friend. Mary Ellen's friend Daniela arrives to join them a little bit later, uninvited and proving to be a little less straight-laced than Mary Ellen is.
Daniela is currently grieving from the recent loss of her father and is suffering with strong feelings of guilt surrounding the circumstances of his death. She is clearly fascinated and intrigued by the work of the Warrens, so while Mary Ellen and Judy are outside rollerskating, she wastes no time in hunting down the keys to the artefact room so that she can take a poke around inside. As Daniela slowly and carefully examines the room and its many contents for us, it's clear that we're getting a pretty good introduction to the variety of horrors set to be unleashed on the girls in some form later on in the movie. It's a slow buildup though, and on top of the babysitter buildup we've had so far, it's probably a good 45 minutes into the movie before anything substantial happens. I read my review of Annabelle Creation before seeing this movie, and I'd noted that following a similar pattern, with very good results, so I wasn't overly concerned by all of that if the payoff was worth it.
The thing is though, when things do start going a little crazy, the results aren't entirely successful. To be fair, there are some genuinely creepy and very well executed scares. But there are also plenty that don't work so well too. Some new spirits are introduced too, no doubt destined to have their own spin-off movie at some point - 'The Ferryman', who guides souls into the afterlife and requires payment of two coins placed on the eyes of the dead, and the 'Hellhound of Essex'. One of those works considerably well, the other just being distracting and silly.
Despite it's slow-burn start, and it's generic baby-sitter horror setting, I definitely enjoyed Annabelle Comes Home. It's certainly not as good as either of The Conjuring movies, or Annabelle Creation, but it's definitely much better than The Nun or The Curse of La Llorona.
After venturing into the past with the previous Annabelle movies, Annabelle Comes Home begins by expanding on the events of The Conjuring. The Warrens take the Annabelle doll into their care in order to keep it safe in their home, under lock and key in their famous artefact room. The car journey home is an eventful one though and it is a real joy to be back in the company of Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga and their portrayal of paranormal investigators, Ed and Lorraine Warren. Their characters, and their performances, have been the most enjoyable aspect of these movies for me and this opening chapter with them gets things off to a great start. With Annabelle in the artefact room, blessed by the local priest and contained in a cabinet made out of chapel glass, the evil is contained. And Annabelle is now home.
From there we shift forward a year, where the focus of the movie turns to the Warren's 10 year old daughter Judy (Mckenna Grace). Her parents occupation and reputation is clearly having an effect on her life, with other children at school poking fun at her and refusing to come to her birthday party at the creepy Warren house. That uncomfortable, uneasy feeling of having a room in your house where unspeakable evil is being contained probably doesn't help things either! When her parents have to go away one night, friendly babysitter Mary Ellen comes over to take care of Judy, stepping in to the role of much needed friend. Mary Ellen's friend Daniela arrives to join them a little bit later, uninvited and proving to be a little less straight-laced than Mary Ellen is.
Daniela is currently grieving from the recent loss of her father and is suffering with strong feelings of guilt surrounding the circumstances of his death. She is clearly fascinated and intrigued by the work of the Warrens, so while Mary Ellen and Judy are outside rollerskating, she wastes no time in hunting down the keys to the artefact room so that she can take a poke around inside. As Daniela slowly and carefully examines the room and its many contents for us, it's clear that we're getting a pretty good introduction to the variety of horrors set to be unleashed on the girls in some form later on in the movie. It's a slow buildup though, and on top of the babysitter buildup we've had so far, it's probably a good 45 minutes into the movie before anything substantial happens. I read my review of Annabelle Creation before seeing this movie, and I'd noted that following a similar pattern, with very good results, so I wasn't overly concerned by all of that if the payoff was worth it.
The thing is though, when things do start going a little crazy, the results aren't entirely successful. To be fair, there are some genuinely creepy and very well executed scares. But there are also plenty that don't work so well too. Some new spirits are introduced too, no doubt destined to have their own spin-off movie at some point - 'The Ferryman', who guides souls into the afterlife and requires payment of two coins placed on the eyes of the dead, and the 'Hellhound of Essex'. One of those works considerably well, the other just being distracting and silly.
Despite it's slow-burn start, and it's generic baby-sitter horror setting, I definitely enjoyed Annabelle Comes Home. It's certainly not as good as either of The Conjuring movies, or Annabelle Creation, but it's definitely much better than The Nun or The Curse of La Llorona.
Bookapotamus (289 KP) rated Painless in Books
Jul 2, 2018
Very Cool Book!
Excuse me for a second, while I go barf. OMG this book. Holy heck the gruesome descriptions of blood and gore and guts was SO RAD. I found myself cringing and fidgeting and yes, even feeling a bit nauseous in some spots - but totally in a GOOD WAY! Painless was exactly what I wanted in a super-unique, creepy, shocking horror-thriller.
Greg Owens is in pain. A LOT of pain. He fell off a ladder on a construction job, injuring his back, and his entire life has gone to shit. He lost his wife, his kid, he can't work, he's addicted to pills. He's desperate, and can't find anything that will help him get relief, so he can return to construction, or any job he doesn't need "Pills to pay the Bills" in order to to work. His addiction is keeping him from his little girl and he's resorted to getting pills illegally from dealers, just to make it though the day.
Dr. Dante Menta is running an exclusive clinical trial. He's been working on a pain relief technique for years, and promises a complete cure of all physical pain. Sign me up, right? We meet all the patients involved in the trial who have arrived before Greg. There are even animal patients. Some of them are seeking relief from back pain, or car accident injuries, others from auto-immune things like Lupus - and even chronic migraine headaches.
The patients are taken in one by one to get the procedure and at first, it's exactly as promised and the results are impressive! But soon, shit starts hitting the fan. Patients are starting to act really strange, obsessive, destructive. Things start to go horribly, horribly wrong. And it's incredible awesome to watch!
I thought this story was really different and the premise was immediately intriguing - it was a quick read, but written really well, and explores a dark side of both how people deal with pain management and also Dr. Mentas obsession with his life's work to find a cure. I would love to see this translated to a horror movie, and I'd be first in line to buy a ticket!
Greg Owens is in pain. A LOT of pain. He fell off a ladder on a construction job, injuring his back, and his entire life has gone to shit. He lost his wife, his kid, he can't work, he's addicted to pills. He's desperate, and can't find anything that will help him get relief, so he can return to construction, or any job he doesn't need "Pills to pay the Bills" in order to to work. His addiction is keeping him from his little girl and he's resorted to getting pills illegally from dealers, just to make it though the day.
Dr. Dante Menta is running an exclusive clinical trial. He's been working on a pain relief technique for years, and promises a complete cure of all physical pain. Sign me up, right? We meet all the patients involved in the trial who have arrived before Greg. There are even animal patients. Some of them are seeking relief from back pain, or car accident injuries, others from auto-immune things like Lupus - and even chronic migraine headaches.
The patients are taken in one by one to get the procedure and at first, it's exactly as promised and the results are impressive! But soon, shit starts hitting the fan. Patients are starting to act really strange, obsessive, destructive. Things start to go horribly, horribly wrong. And it's incredible awesome to watch!
I thought this story was really different and the premise was immediately intriguing - it was a quick read, but written really well, and explores a dark side of both how people deal with pain management and also Dr. Mentas obsession with his life's work to find a cure. I would love to see this translated to a horror movie, and I'd be first in line to buy a ticket!
JT (287 KP) rated Child's Play (2019) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Re-imagining of classic horror films can go either way. They can stick close to the original while giving it a fresh injection of gore to satisfy the bloodthirsty millennials. Or deviate it from the storyline altogether to put its own spin on the narrative.
In the Child’s Play remake the original ‘Good Guy’ dolls have been replaced by 21st-century technology in the form of ‘Buddi’ dolls which, have been produced by Kaslan Industries. And instead of a psychotic serial killer transferring his soul to the body of a doll, Buddi has all of his safety features disabled by a disgruntled Kaslan employee. The change from possession to A.I. fits perfectly within the modern world where people rely heavily on their phones and various voice-activated gadgets.
The gore levels should more than satisfy horror fans with death scenes ranging from tillers, saws and self-driving cars
Best friends, Chucky and Andy (Gabriel Bateman) share a moment
Chucky, as he will inevitably call himself, makes his way to Chicago and into the home of the Barclay’s, where mum Karen (Aubrey Plaza) gets her hands on the defective doll as an early birthday present for son Andy (Gabriel Bateman). After a few small glitches (eyes turning red) Andy and Chucky start to form a close bond. But the bond takes a sinister turn when Chucky starts to act differently in his pursuit of the ultimate friendship.
One of the highlights of the film is the brilliant casting of Mark Hamill as the voice of the murderous doll. Hamill (outside of Star Wars) is well known as a talented voice actor, having provided the voice of the Joker in the animated series. Hamill uses his full range of softly spoken innocence and demented rage to portray a character who is influenced by everything around him (there are blatant references to E.T.) and then uses it to the best of his ability in killing off people in a range of horrific (and comical) ways.
The gore levels should more than satisfy horror fans with death scenes ranging from tillers, saws and self-driving cars. It’s not without its faults but this satirical take on the slasher genre is certainly B-movie levels at best.
In the Child’s Play remake the original ‘Good Guy’ dolls have been replaced by 21st-century technology in the form of ‘Buddi’ dolls which, have been produced by Kaslan Industries. And instead of a psychotic serial killer transferring his soul to the body of a doll, Buddi has all of his safety features disabled by a disgruntled Kaslan employee. The change from possession to A.I. fits perfectly within the modern world where people rely heavily on their phones and various voice-activated gadgets.
The gore levels should more than satisfy horror fans with death scenes ranging from tillers, saws and self-driving cars
Best friends, Chucky and Andy (Gabriel Bateman) share a moment
Chucky, as he will inevitably call himself, makes his way to Chicago and into the home of the Barclay’s, where mum Karen (Aubrey Plaza) gets her hands on the defective doll as an early birthday present for son Andy (Gabriel Bateman). After a few small glitches (eyes turning red) Andy and Chucky start to form a close bond. But the bond takes a sinister turn when Chucky starts to act differently in his pursuit of the ultimate friendship.
One of the highlights of the film is the brilliant casting of Mark Hamill as the voice of the murderous doll. Hamill (outside of Star Wars) is well known as a talented voice actor, having provided the voice of the Joker in the animated series. Hamill uses his full range of softly spoken innocence and demented rage to portray a character who is influenced by everything around him (there are blatant references to E.T.) and then uses it to the best of his ability in killing off people in a range of horrific (and comical) ways.
The gore levels should more than satisfy horror fans with death scenes ranging from tillers, saws and self-driving cars. It’s not without its faults but this satirical take on the slasher genre is certainly B-movie levels at best.