Change Your Image
![](https://cdn.statically.io/img/m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMTcxMzg1NDI0MF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMzc3NjI4MTE@._V1_SY100_SX100_.jpg)
bowmanblue
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Ledge (2022)
Bad man is bad
You know how sometimes there are bad films and there are good films? Well... 'The Ledge' just doesn't fall into either category, instead simply ending up at exactly the midway point between the two. There's nothing terribly awful about it (for what it is), but there's not an awful lot about it that makes it stand out.
Two young women go climbing in the wilderness as a bit of an 'adventure holiday,' only for one of them to end up being murdered by a gang of four men. The surviving woman catches the crime on camera and a chase ensues - a long chase.
Nothing wrong with the premise. It's nice and simple. 'Final girl' practically starts off the film as the 'final girl' and has to evade her pursuers for the movie's runtime. But what got me was the antagonists - mainly one of them. He's bad, you see? He's bad because he does bad things - always. And he speaks about bad things - always. He does bad things to - presumably - everyone he meets. He's bad. Do you get the impression this is a bad man? He's so bad it starts to cross the line into parody when every line that comes out of his mouth is like something a pantomime villain would say. The other three guys are comprised of one who does question what they're doing (so he kind of stands out) and the other two are just generic henchmen-types who you won't even remember.
Despite its acceptable enough plot and performance from the lead, it's a bit slow. Yes, I know it's not supposed to be a 'high-octane' thrill ride and those who get the most out of it will be the ones in the mood for more of a 'slow burner.' But the film is effectively one long cliff climb. And, seeing as physics dictate that you can hardly speed up giant vertical heights, everything progresses about as fast as the 'chase' from 'The Last Jedi.' Talking of 'Star Wars,' whenever our protagonist has to make a particularly tricky grip, you almost get an Obi-wan Kenobi moment where you hear her former instructor tell her to 'Use the Force!' Or something like that.
For all its faults, it's perfectly watchable. I figured a fair proportion of it would be filmed on a soundstage, but, if it was, I found it hard to make out. The locations were made the best of and the overall look of the film was professionally done. It's not the worst film you'll ever see, but there are definitely better. I know I watched a film about climbers being pursued by killers set in Scotland about fifteen years ago. I wish I could remember what it was called. It was good though - better than this, sadly.
Train (2008)
Get off at this stop for your hostel
I think if I had to sum up 2008's 'Train' I'd simply say, 'Hostel... but not as good.' I'm not trying to say that 'Hostel' was a particular masterpiece, but, if you were in the mood for some grisly entertainment, it fitted the bill.
It's like the people behind 'Train' watched 'Hostel,' photocopied the script, changed a few things here and there and then tried to pass this off as an 'original' film. Even the particularly uninspired title 'Train' is a single word, ala 'Hostel.'
On the off-chance you're into gory horror films and don't know about 'Hostel' then it's about some American backpackers who are on holiday in Eastern Europe, only to fall foul of the locals in some of the most gruesome ways imaginable. That's basically 'Train's' plot, too. I know 'Train' is about some high school students instead of holidaymakers and the reason behind the mayhem is slightly different, but, like I say, the film-makers changed bits sporadically.
The characters are bland and the gore isn't anything you haven't seen before. Thora Birch is a decent enough actress, but she's given little to work with here, coming across just like anything other 'final girl/scream queen' from a slasher movie.
I know I'm being harsh on 'Train' and, believe it or not, it's not that bad. It's more just pointless because it doesn't really bring anything new (let alone better!) to the table than 'Hostel' managed. 'Hostel' effectively reinvented the 'torture p0rn' sub-genre of horror and 'Train' tries to capitalise on that fad. Only it doesn't have the originality, or the budget to really surpass it's predecessor.
If you like gruesome gore - watch 'Hostel.' I'm sure you can find it on one streaming service or another. 'Train' just isn't original enough to waste your time on if you're in the mood for this niche branch of the genre.
The Bikeriders (2023)
Goodfellas with motorbikes
From almost the opening scene I was thinking 'Goodfellas' when I sat down to watch 'The Bikeriders,' mainly because of how it's effectively told from the girlfriend of one of the main protagonist's perspective. It certainly takes the 'gangster genre' and transplants it onto a group of motorbike riders with its gritty take into the world. Apparently, it's based on a book, written by a journalist who spent time with the bikers during the late 60s and early 70s and does a good job of capturing the brotherhood, loyalty and (occasional intense!) violence that define the biker subculture.
Tom Hardy delivers the outstanding performance of the film, not straying too far away from what he's done before with his tough-guy act as character of the club's leader. His inclusion as kindly, yet menacing adds a definitely depth to the film that elevates it beyond a typical crime drama. Hardy is definitely the stand-out, but that largely because he literally seems to have more lines to work with than the actual protagonist who, although does a good impression of a 'James Dean' type character, his lack of dialogue does wonders for Tom Hardy's input.
While the main storyline drives the story well, some of the sub-plots involving some younger gang-members feels a bit redundant initially. These narrative threads seem to not really go anywhere until they finally clash with the central characters at the end, but, until then, they do feel a bit distracting. However, as the film progresses, these seemingly extraneous elements are woven back into the main plot in a way that enhances the overall story. The eventual payoff of these sub-plots has its own merits, but you'll only really appreciate it when you know why it's been added.
Overall, 'The Bikeriders' is a great little film which I haven't seen anything like it in the cinema for a long time. It's deep, gritty, but at the same time could almost be considered a bit of a 'love story' with the central characters and their relationship which is strained when it clashes with the 'biker lifestyle.' If you like your gritty dramas, or are just a fan of Tom Hardy and decent storytelling, it stands out as a noteworthy entry in the genre.
Spiderhead (2022)
Should have been 'Black Mirror'
'Spiderhead' starts off slow and takes a while to get going. Straight away we can see it's sent in a futuristic prison where inmates are subjected to experimental drugs. Chris Hemsworth is the warden/scientist in charge of the facility who does his best to keep things entertaining and provides a solid anchor for the story.
However, despite Hemsworth's performance, the film struggles with pacing issues, particularly in its first half. The initial setup drags on, feeling more like an extended episode of 'Black Mirror' rather than a feature-length movie. This extended buildup attempts to establish the characters and the dystopian setting, but lacked enough momentum to stop me wanting to check my phone.
The narrative picks up in the second half, but the final act introduces complexities that might leave some viewers confused. The final result could either be considered 'thought-provoking' or rushed and if you're hoping for something that is spood-fed to you, you won't be getting it here.
Overall, 'Spiderhead' is a good concept that would have worked better if it was a forty-five minute episode of a sci-fi TV show, as it left me just wanting to skip to the pay-off and see what is really going on. It delivers some engaging moments and fans of Hemsworth are in for a treat with his mini 'dance number,' but the uneven pacing and a convoluted finale detract from its overall impact.
Baghead (2023)
Good premise, bad character
I think it's fair to say that anyone into horror movies hardly expects deep and nuanced characters when they tune in to watch a man with a mask inserting chainsaws into teenagers. I'll wager you won't remember most slashers' victims names by the time the credits roll. They're normally there to simply be dismembered in memorable ways. However, when it comes to 'Baghead' there's only really three (or maybe four) 'main' characters. And they're all completely unlikable.
I like the idea behind the story. There's a creature that lives behind the wall in the basement of an old pub and it can take the form of your dead relatives... if you should so want it to. But, like I say, I just didn't care enough about the people at stake.
The young woman who inherits the pub is just miserable and, without really getting much in the way of her backstory, makes her subsequent decisions a little hard to understand. The evil is tethered to the building, so, er, you could just leave, right? Apparently, not. Then there's her best friend. She has even less depth and backstory than the protagonist. She's just annoying, mouthy and, well, the best friend. The two other minor male characters may have a little in the way of motivation, but you won't really care if they live or die either.
And then there's the sets. They're very blatantly sets. Everything has this weird 'clean' feel about it - even the places that are supposed to be old and run-down.
Believe it or not, I didn't completely hate it. It's a reasonable enough horror film, but in a very over-populated genre I felt it didn't have much to offer that I haven't seen several decades before in other movies like 'The Ring' or 'The Grudge' (either original Japanese, or American remakes are better than 'Baghead').
Ambulance (2022)
Michael Bay's back
If you thought Michael Bay only dealt with motor vehicles who come from other planets and can transform into giant robots, then think again. The - not so imaginatively titled - "Ambulance" feels like a throwback to his action films of the 1990s, such as 'Bad Boys' and 'The Rock.' If you enjoyed that era of his output then you will definitely a blast here. This time Bay integrates modern film-making technology with the use of drones, which adds a fresh dimension to the chaos.
Jake Gyllenhaal delivers a standout performance, bringing his usual mix of charm and intensity to his role. His portrayal of Danny Sharp, a career bank robber with a complicated moral compass. It's mainly him who anchors the film amidst the mayhem and his ability to convey desperation, wit, and a touch of madness makes him the most compelling aspect of the movie.
While the film excels in delivering non-stop action, it suffers from an overly generous runtime. At over two hours, the relentless pace begins to feel exhaustive, and certain scenes could have been trimmed to maintain a tighter narrative. This would have ensured that the suspense remains sharp and the storyline more concise.
Another point of contention is the film's approach to violence. In true Bay fashion, "Ambulance" features a barrage of bullets, but their impact often feels inconsequential. Characters repeatedly emerge with holes in pretty vital areas and yet feel like they'll be fine when things should probably have been fatal, which diminishes the stakes and undercuts the sense of danger. This almost cartoonish invulnerability might jar viewers seeking a more grounded action experience.
Overall, "Ambulance" is a decent and wild ride that captures the essence of Michael Bay's early work while incorporating contemporary filmmaking techniques. Jake Gyllenhaal's excellent performance is a highlight, though the film could benefit from a leaner edit and a more realistic depiction of its high-stakes shootouts. Despite its flaws, it's a bombastic spectacle that will satisfy fans of Bay's brand of action.
Troll (2022)
Well... I liked it!
I was actually surprised at the level of dislike this movie received when I came to review it online. Okay, it's no masterpiece, but it's great fun with really good special effects and totally enjoyable to watch.
Set in Norway, a team of miners accidentally unleash a giant troll which goes on the rampage through the country. I see a lot of people saying how this is effectively 'Godzilla, but with a troll.' And it is. But is that so bad?
The fact that it's set in Norway with actors who are definitely 'non-Hollywood,' mixed with scenery and settings which are - again - not in America, go a long way to make this movie stand out among other similar entries in the genre.
Again, I reiterate that it's no masterpiece and that it's without flaws. Some of the characters I found a little annoying (even though I was watching the 'English dub' of the film), such as the geeky military girl who just so happens to be able to hack a fighter jet while on mission (and then gets no punishment when caught doing so) and the obligatory high-ranking idiot who gets what's coming to him - but I mainly didn't like him due to how much he seems to look like a Norwegian version of James Corden.
However, those annoying characters aside, the effects really do work. Obviously, a lot of what the film-makers needed to create were done with computers and I've seen plenty of recent blockbusters with much bigger budgets look much worse than this (what's that third 'Ant-man' film again?). I thought the troll itself was really well done and the CGI used was integrated well.
Overall, don't go expecting a classic, but there's certainly enough fun here for you to enjoy if you need your 'monster munching' fix and can find this on a streaming service.
Chupacabra Territory (2016)
Blair Witch Chupacabra
Sometimes you really wish you'd get an extra hour and a half of your life back that you wasted on a film. Perhaps it was my own fault - I could have turned it off, but I didn't. I was holding out hope that something might actually happen. Spoiler - it doesn't.
Back in 1999 'The Blair Witch Project' redefined the 'found footage' genre of horror films. It was a 'mock' documentary about some teenagers who set off into the woods to chart a supernatural myth (and end up falling foul to it). That's a summary of 'The Blair Witch Project,' but it can also be applied exactly to 'Lair of the Beast.'
It's all filmed 'first person' as four youngsters try to get footage of a creature known as the 'chupacabra' who allegedly stalks and drinks goats' blood. You can effectively skip the first half. It's all set-up. I know the film is supposed to be a 'slow burn' and gradually build up the terror, but it's just boring and nothing really happens that you won't be able to pick up midway. The characters, although the actors do their best with what they're given. Are totally forgettable and you won't remember their names, let alone care about their plight.
I liked 'The Blair Witch Project' and that was hardly a rollercoaster from start to finish, so I was willing to give this one the benefit of the doubt, hoping the second half will pick up. It never did. The thing about most 'found footage' movies is that they're cheap to produce, but this one really didn't seem to have anything in the way of budget in terms of special effects, so don't get your hopes up there.
It's just shaky-cam footage of the characters which starts out normal and gradually gets harder to see what's going on as the climax starts to draw closer. If you like found footage films then you'll have seen better. Don't bother with this one. Ironically, I own 'The Blair Witch Project' on DVD. I wish I'd just put that on instead, as I haven't seen it for a while.
Morbius (2022)
Well, it's definitely a superhero film
I'd heard a lot of bad things about 2022's 'Morbius' and seen more than a few memes online, saying what a terrible film it is. It's a superhero film. I know it's a superhero film because it plays out like someone has written down every core element of the genre and ticked them off one by one.
Jared Leto plays the titular character who is stricken with a rare diseased, leaving him crippled. So he dedicates his life to finding a cure - which he does, only using artificial blood, giving him vampire-like powers. From there, every trope you're familiar with in modern superhero movies is played out. Hero gets powers - check. Bad guy gets almost identical powers - check. Love interest kidnapped - check. CGI fight where you can't really make out what's going on - check. Sequel-bait that's supposed to hook you into a 'shared universe' which doesn't really go anywhere. And so on.
So, it's pretty generic, but some of it's major let-downs are just how little you'll care for Jared Leto's protagonist, Morbius. He's dull and not that interesting, which would be bad enough, if it wasn't for the fact that the villain - Matt 'Dr Who' Smith - is actually quite fun to watch and it's tempting to root for him.
If you like the idea of a vampire meets superhero film then 'Blade' did this three times over twenty years ago and each time was far superior to 'Morbius' (yes, even 'Blade: Trinity' was better!). Plus the 'Blade' trilogy seemed to have better special effects, even two decades ago. The CGI really is laughable in 'Morbius.'
If the whole superhero genre didn't exist until now and 'Morbius' came first, it may actually be considered a classic or a trend-settter. However, with so many other superhero movies to choose from this one is just buried so far down under the weight of a hundred better entries, it's not worth bothering with, because you probably have better in your DVD collection or can find better on a streaming service.
Scream (2022)
Not bad... for a requel
I've been a fan of the 'Scream' franchise since the beginning. Yes, we all know the original is the best and the follow-ups have basically steadily declined in quality, but I still think they're fun and a cut above the average 'slasher' movie. So, how does 'part 5' compare? Well... it's good. Or does it just seem good because so many modern films are so bad?
Granted it offers nothing new. If you've seen one 'Scream' film (or 'slasher' flick in general) there's nothing here that will blow you away. A masked killer stalks and murders a selection of teenage victims until the final act where he's unmasked and ultimately defeated (until the next time, of course).
However, it seems that the original cast have been shelved and we're introduced to new protagonists called... I forget. They're generic teenagers, but one does seem to have a link to an original cast member from 1997. The initial characters may be a bit drab, but the writing saves them and there's some nice meta commentary on the genre and society. Luckily, the story takes a dramatic up-turn when the film-makers realise that they can't really make a 'Scream' movie without the original line-up of Neve Campbell, David Arquette and Counteney Cox - and they save every scene they're in.
So the story is pretty well set-up for a solid sequel with a good cast, writing and tried and tested premise. The problem for me was how some of the scenes just didn't make sense if you dared to think of the logic behind any of them. For a start the kills were pretty mundane. Yes, I guess there's a bit of blood and guts here and there, but nothing you haven't seen before and better/gorier. The part I couldn't get over was how most of the kills take place in a location that should be packed with people. It's like the killer has the superpower to teleport himself and his victim to an alternate dimension where only the two of them exist.
Maybe it's just nostalgia, or maybe it's because there are so many bad horror films on streaming services, but, despite it's many flaws, I enjoyed seeing the cast back for one last ride... before the obvious sequel arrives.
The Red Tide Massacre (2022)
Why so serious?
I've always been a fan of horror as a genre. So, now we have streaming services I will happily give pretty much anything in the genre a go. However, there's so much utter dross on there that it seems nowadays the mark of whether a film is 'good' or not is whether I can actually sit through it. I managed to last the entire of 'Red Tide Massacre,' not that it's exactly a 'great' film - merely watchable for ninety minutes.
There's a monster on the loose by the beach in Florida and a young deputy must team up with a reporter and a scientist to stop the 'massacre.' Oh, and I should probably say that 'massacre' is not the term I'd use for the amount of killing on display here. Mild deadly rampage would suit it better.
Despite not outright hating this movie, there isn't much to recommend. Although the acting is competent, the leading man comes across as miserable and surly (despite the amount of female attention he receives!). If you're hoping for scares, there isn't any. It utilised many a 'horror cliche' including the one about when a character says 'I'll be right back' they're about to be murdered brutally (didn't 'Scream' point this out back in 1997?) and the 'gore effects' are possibly some of the most laughable I've ever seen. If blood is required it's - presumably - computer-added in post production and it looks like someone has drawn the red liquid on afterwards like an animated cartoon!
The creature itself is hardly groundbreaking. It's a guy in a mask. End of. Okay, it's actually quite a good mask, but it's a 'good mask' if you saw it on someone trick or treating on Halloween, not in a theatrical film.
Most of the victims you won't really care about because they're only introduced into the very scene where they're due to die in. And if any water is required to be red, the film-makers just slap a red filter over half the lens! Maybe it would have worked better if it was a bit more 'self-knowing.' Perhaps they could have played into the overall 'cheap' feel. Sadly, every scene is played straight - sometimes TOO straight and the dramatic music can even drown out the (supposedly!) deep and meaningful dialogue.
So, it has a lot of cons and not many pros. It's probably not that good if looked at objectively, however, if you compare it to 90% of the horror films that seem to be made deliberately for streaming sites, then it's actually a bit better, or at least watchable, as I proved by getting to the credits only checking my Instagram on my phone a few times during the runtime.
Enter the Dragon (1973)
There can only be the one Bruce Lee
'Enter the Dragon' stands as a monument in the martial arts genre and, if you watch the DVD version, you'll be treated to the extended cut which further solidifies its legendary status. The introduction on the DVD is from Bruce Lee's widow and she informs us that this version restores more of the 'spiritual' aspects of Lee's philosophy. Of course the main focus is the unparalleled prowess of Bruce Lee, showcasing his awesome fighting technique. Watching Lee in action, it's clear the world will never again witness a star of his caliber. His unique combination of philosophy, physicality, and screen presence transcends time, making 'Enter the Dragon' as enjoyable to watch today as it ever was.
The film has a diverse cast which was groundbreaking for its era, featuring talents from various backgrounds that added depth to the story. John Saxon's rugged charm and Jim Kelly's charismatic coolness perfectly complemented Lee's intensity. You also have the antagonists, led by Shih Kien's Han, who was delightfully over the top. These antagonists, with their elaborate schemes and exotic lairs, imbued the film with a vibe reminiscent of a James Bond adventure, blending espionage with martial arts in a way that was both thrilling and innovative.
The extended cut offers a more immersive experience, with additional fight scenes and character development that enhance the narrative. The choreography is as precise and mesmerizing as ever, showcasing Lee's legendary speed and technique. Each fight is a testament to his dedication to martial arts, making every sequence a masterclass in combat.
'Enter the Dragon' remains today the cultural phenomenon it was at the time. The extended cut ensures that new generations can appreciate the full scope of Bruce Lee's genius, reaffirming why no one else can ever fill his shoes in the world of martial arts cinema. This movie remains a must-watch for fans of the genre, a spectacular blend of action, drama, and timeless appeal.
Numbers (2022)
Should have been about half an hour long
Sometimes you watch a film and think, 'Yeah, I can see what they were going for.' It's just a pity they didn't pull it off. I like the idea of 'Death Count' - it tries to be a satirical social commentary on our addiction to 'likes' on social media. Eight people awake to find themselves prisoners in an online game where they must perform grisly tasks on themselves for the internet's amusement. The one who gets the least amount of 'likes' gets... well, it's a horror movie, so it's not good for the loser of each round.
The problem is it's dragged out too long. One plus side is that there's a decent amount of gore if that's all you're looking for. The budget means the gore isn't top notch, but if you're forgiving of the lack of finance behind the production then you may be okay on that one. However, it still doesn't take away from the fact that if you took the excessive bodily mutilation out of the film and trimmed it down by half, you could - sort of - be left with a lesser episode of 'Black Mirror.'
Michael Madsen is in it, too. Once upon a time that might be a selling point, but his character feels crowbarred in simply because he's the only face you'll recognise. He looks typically bored, but he's head and shoulders over the 'antagonist' of the piece. This mysterious masked figure oversees the goings on and he's bad. We know he's bad because he dressed like a bad guy (albeit one with a low budget for his wardrobe) and he talks like a bad guy. Every line he says comes from a 'super villain's handbook.' He really his quite painful to watch when he's on screen.
If you're going to get anything out of this you'll have to severely suspend your disbelief to go with it. The fact that this online 'show' seems to be known to the entire world, yet only the local police department seem to feel the need to investigate is a major plot drawback. If you're really in the mood for some low budget torture p**n then this might fill an hour and twenty five minutes if you can find it for free on a streaming service.
Shredder (2001)
Generic, even by 2001's standards
With all the talk of 'A. I.' these days, I'm almost tempted to wonder whether 'Shredder' was actually written by some sort of cheap online algorithm. Then I realise it was made back in 2001 and so I have to come to terms with that it's possibly one of the most generic slasher movies you're ever likely to see.
If you've seen even one slasher movie and therefore can name one cliche or trope then you'll find it repeated here - only more predictable. It's about your typical group of good-looking teens/twenty-somethings taking a break to a remote ski resort in order to test their snowboarding prowess.
And so you get the opening scene of the killer offing a random victim. Then we're introduced to our 'heroes,' many of which are the most unlikable characters ever committed to screen, so you won't give a damn when they're dispatched one by one. All the character cliches are there, including an incredibly annoying guy with a video camera whose primary focus is to spout exposition and fill in the audience on things they may not understand (even though someone with an IQ of under five wouldn't get lost in this film.
You'll probably guess who'll survive based on how nice they are and the 'reveal' of the killer is also predictable due to who's not on screen at the time of each kill. There's not enough inventive gore to keep anyone who's looking for that sort of thing happy. The killer has no real stand-out look about him and he tends to get rid of the cast by whatever means he happens to have at the time, rather than anything that would be specific to him and would stick in the audience's head.
Overall, there's nothing particularly wrong with 'Shredder' (apart from misleading you into thinking it's some sort of 'Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles' spin-off about their primary antagonist - which would probably be better than what is actually here!) - it's main problem is its so generic that you'll forget it probably before it's even finished. If you like slasher films then find one you already know you like and put that on rather than take a chance with this.
Catacombs (2007)
One person can't carry this
On paper 'Catacombs' sounds like a reasonable concept for a horror movie. An American tourist who's visiting her sister in Paris, gets lost beneath the city in a network of tunnels and ends up being stalked by something not particularly nice.
Sadly, that's about it and its major drawbacks is its singular focus on the one woman, Victoria (Shannyn Sossamon), who is the film's lone protagonist navigating through the various darkened tunnels. This doesn't mean the movie is automatically bad as 'The Descent' uses a similar setting and story and yet manages to do so much more with it that 'The Descent' is a cult classic and this one is just forgettable. From the outset, it becomes glaringly obvious that Victoria, despite her constant running, screaming, and encountering supposed threats, is going to survive until the final act. This predictability strips away any genuine suspense or fear, leaving the audience able to skip to the final ten minutes to actually find out what will happen to her.
And that's really all the film has, i.e. Dark chaotic scenes where Victoria is frantically moving through the tunnels and it grows tiresome pretty quickly. Maybe it's trying to build tension, but the repetitive nature of these scenes makes them feel monotonous. There are only so many times one can watch a character sprint through dark, narrow corridors without losing interest. The film misses numerous opportunities to develop the few secondary characters who pop up (and guess what happens to them?!) let alone have time to any subplots that could have added depth.
Despite its actually quite clever choice of setting and the potential that could have been used, 'Catacombs' squanders these elements by sticking too rigidly to its lone protagonist and her repetitive plight. The catacombs themselves could even have been a character in their own right, yet are underutilized, with their potential to instill claustrophobia and fear left largely untapped.
There's not much in the way of gore if that's what you're looking for and although it may provide a few fleeting moments of fright, they are overshadowed by the repetitive and ultimately uninspiring journey through one dark, nondescript tunnel after the next.
Mimic 2 (2001)
Not as good as the (average!) original
It's hard for the average horror sequel to come close to the original. Let alone when the original was only really slightly better than average at best. 'Mimic 2' is the sequel to the 1997 sci-fi horror film of the same name about giant bugs living in New York who have developed the ability to - wait for it - mimic humans in order to hunt them. Unfortunately, this one fall even shorter of the original, offering a less engaging and more predictable experience.
The storyline centers around Remi Panos (Alix Koromzay) who just so happens to be an expert in bugs and then finds herself targeted by the nasties. The film struggles to recapture the eerie atmosphere and suspense of its predecessor, leaning heavily on familiar horror tropes and lacking the originality that made the first 'Mimic' even vaguely memorable. The plot is predictable, and the scares feel recycled rather than fresh or innovative.
Remi seems to live in an neighbourhood where all the male characters are either incompetent or outright unlikable criminals. Most of the men in the film are either portrayed as sleazy, ineffectual, or aggressive, which just makes them easier for us to not care about when they get their inevitable payback from the giant bugs.
While the first film at least had a better cast and went some way to embrace its cheesy, B-movie roots, this one fails to capture that same spirit. The practical effects and creature design are serviceable but are nothing that you haven't seen before. Additionally, the direction and pacing often feel disjointed, with moments of tension undermined by clunky dialogue and uneven performances.
There are a few moments of tension and decent creature effects, but it ultimately fails to live up to the original's quirky appeal. Stick to the first one.
Martin (1977)
Great, but dated
George A. Romero's, best known for his '...of the Dead' series, brings us his own gritty take on the vampire genre, 'Martin.' Nowadays, we've had 'realistic' takes on various supernatural creatures, but I'm guessing that this was one of the first to stand out for its portrayal of a young man's struggle with his bloodlust. Released in 1977, "Martin" eschews the traditional tropes of vampire lore, presenting instead a deeply psychological and unsettling narrative that looks at themes of what might drive someone in this position to do the things he does.
The film follows the titular Martin, a troubled young man who believes himself to be an 84-year-old vampire. Unlike the elegant, supernatural creatures of classic vampire cinema, he uses syringes instead of fangs and lacks any mystical powers, making his predatory behavior disturbingly plausible. This grounded approach lends the movie an almost documentary-like feel, enhancing its eerie atmosphere.
Romero's direction is disconcerting and raw, taking us back - once again if you know his zombie flicks - to Pittsburgh and its decaying urban landscape and it almost feel like it could be set in some sort of 'shared universe' with his 'Dawn of the Dead' classic.
John Amplas delivers a great performance as Martin, perfectly embodying the character's vulnerability and menace, but the film definitely has its moment of nastiness and the violence he portrays is pretty dark.
However, while 'Martin' remains a well-made film, it does feel dated by today's standards. The pacing can be slow, and some elements, such as the grainy visual quality and the dated special effects, might not resonate with today's audiences who are probably more accustomed to computer-generated alien armies rampaging through New York while a giant sky-beam threatens the world. Additionally, the previously-mentioned 'dark subject matter' might come across as problematic to modern viewers. But, leaving these smaller drawbacks aside, 'Martin' still holds up today as an exploration of the popular creature and if you're a fan of Romero's filmography and/or the horror genre at large you should definitely get something out of it.
Happy Little Bunnies (2021)
What did I just watch?
Many people lament the fact that 'cinema' is largely taken up with remake, sequels and prequels with very little in the way of originality. 'Happy Little Bunnies' is certainly different - whether you like it or not may be a different story.
If you read the marketing you'll see that there's a serial killer on the loose (who seems to like dressing like the lowest budget rabbit you'll ever see) while a man is having a therapy session with a psychiatrist. Yeah, that is about what the entire film consists of. How do those two plots intertwine? Well, you'll have to watch the film to find out.
And that's when you'll either love its quirkiness and originality, or find it the biggest pile of pretentious nonsense you'll have seen in your life. I can see the arguments for both.
The bulk of the film is the psychiatrist's session with his patient. This is intercut with not only flashbacks from the past, but - presumably - completely random scenes of bunny-murder. Confused? You probably will be. And the film knows it - and enjoys your confusion. How do I know? Because it even 'stops' (sort of) halfway for the director to taunt you to your face. Again, you'll either laugh at this and appreciate it and find it fitting with the film's off-the-wall feel, or find it completely unnecessary and jarring. Again, I can see it from both sides.
Personally, I quite enjoyed it. Although I was definitely invested in the film because I wanted to see how it all worked out in the end (I suspected everything was not what it seemed, but didn't predict the ending!) the 'high points' for me was the relationship between psychiatrist and patient. I found their conversation quite interesting and brought up some interesting aspects about today's society and our culture as a whole.
But, like I've stressed, you'll either love or hate this film. It really is knowingly over-the-top and revels in the confusion it causes. If you're prepared for a ride like that, give it a go - it's quite good fun.
Sleep. Walk. Kill. (2022)
Almost completely watchable
'Sleep. Walk. Kill.' occupies a strange place in my opinion. There are plenty of low budget horror films on various online streaming platforms and many of them are so bad that I turn them off and don't bother even trying to review them. However, I watched this one all the way to the end, so there must have been something there that was interesting or entertaining. It's just there seemed to be so many flaws in it.
It's about a strange loud noise that echos out across America, making anyone who falls asleep a mindless killer. One lovable loser has to try and keep his family together while holding out against the source of this supernatural event. It's a horror comedy in a (very!) similar style to the classic 'Shaun of the Dead.'
What I'm going to do next is basically tear into the film like it's the worst movie ever made, yet it's not. First of all, when I say 'low budget' I really mean it. The gore is just about passable, but the acting is terrible. Yes, I know we've all seen a bad actor or two pop up in a film and yet here pretty much everyone seems to be reading their lines off a cue-card just off screen.
Then we have the direction itself. It's like half the shots you can almost tell that the actors were simply standing there waiting for the director to shout 'Action!' and then start performing accordingly. The edits are sometimes jarring, especially when there's a scene that they clearly didn't have the budget/skill to film, so they just sort of use the loosest of camera tricks (maybe cut away from the action and only return to the aftermath) and hope that the audience doesn't notice.
Now, I don't know whether this was something to do with the streaming site or even my TV that I watched the film on (if so, please ignore this criticism), but the audio was all over the place. It was like you needed to turn the volume way up to hear the characters speak, but then when some music was played over any dramatic part, it blares out at you and you have to quickly hit the 'volume down' button on your remote.
So, there you have it - many reasons not to like it. But I stuck with it. And, I think that the reason I did (besides seeing if there was an eventual explanation for the supernatural happening) was that the dialogue was actually quite funny. Sure, the characters were hardly developed, but there were more than a few times when I let out a genuine chuckle or two. So, set your expectations low and you might find something at least entertainingly watchable for an hour and a half.
Rage - Furia primitiva (1988)
The '28 Days Later' prequel?
In case you hadn't guessed by the cheesy title, 'Primal Rage' is B-movie horror flick that delivers a mix of camp, chaos, and commendable creativity. Despite its low-budget constraints, this film manages to carve out a niche for itself with reasonable gore effects and a plot that, in hindsight, feels like an early precursor to the zombie resurgence seen in 2001's "28 Days Later."
The story revolves around a rage-inducing virus that run rampant around a university and turns people into rabid, bloodthirsty maniacs. The narrative is straightforward but effective, following a group of students as they battle the escalating chaos caused by the outbreak. The film's practical effects deserve a nod; the gore, while not overly gratuitous, is enough to satisfy genre enthusiasts without descending into excessive brutality.
It may not have the dread and genuine scares of '28 Days Later,' it is a decent enough little B-movie if you're into your eighties horror films and chooses not to have 'traditional' zombies, in favour of Danny Boyle's 'infected.'
The acting is - at best - average (but you probably wouldn't be expecting Oscar-worthy performances with a film like this!). However, this adds to the movie's charm and you'll know it's from the eighties as soon as the opening theme starts playing.
It may not be the greatest zombie/infected offering, but it's a solid enough entry in the B-movie horror canon. It doesn't break new ground but delivers what it promises: a fun, gory romp that entertains without demanding too much from its audience.
Skinford (2017)
I really wanted to like this more
Wow, this film was a 'rollercoaster' and by that I mean that my opinion of whether I actually liked or disliked it kind of changed every other scene. It starts out with our protagonist 'Skinny' about to be executed in the middle of, er, the 'English outback' (seriously, I may be from the UK, but I didn't recognise a single location and characters' accent seemed to fluctuate!). Two things then happen which I will simply class as 'supernatural.'
Now, I don't mind a good 'mystery' film - whether all points are wrapped up by the end of the story, or enough answers have been given which give the audience a decent chance of unraveling everything after the credits have rolled. However, Skinny has the chance to ask the other main character in the film what exactly is going on - and yet he never really does. I know that, in terms of writing, no writer would create a mystery, only to solve it two minutes later. But the fact that Skinny never asks (or at least doesn't really find out until the final act in line with the audience) kind of ruins the film in terms of story.
But it was an engaging mystery and it kept me hooked. However, what transpired was a movie which had nice ideas and yet either the writing let it down, the acting ability of some of the cast, or lack of budget. Sometimes a new character comes into the story and we're instantly teleported to a flashback which explains the new person's relevance. This is kind of jarring and puts the film's story in reverse. A couple of the actors either can't act or overact and a couple even behave like straight out cartoon characters. When it comes to budget, there are some computer effects which you'll have to be forgiving on, but a better example is a car chase through - what is by all accounts - a completely deserted city. Therefore the lack of any other vehicle on the road (a fact I dispute, living in the UK, even in the dead of night!) really does hamper any terms of stake as there's not much to crash in to.
So, I stuck with it and most of the questions were suitably answered, even if you may have to really suspend your disbelief to the max in order to let the plot slide. I hear there's a sequel and I'd actually be up for watching it if I can track it down - mainly just out of curiosity - because I think there are genuinely good intentions and ideas here and I'd like to see the film-makers behind it sharpen their skills and make something a little more focused.
Drawn Into the Night (2022)
The proverbial car crash
This film has to be seen to be believed. Granted it's not the worst horror/slasher movie I've ever suffered through, but it certainly had its own... feel. And it wasn't a good one. Maybe the reason I found it so odd-paced came when I looked into it online. When I sat down to watch it I noticed it was only just over an hour long, but when I checked online I was informed that it was actually a heavily edited version of a more normal (ninety minute) film of a slightly different name.
That would explain why it feels so rushed. We're whizzed at breakneck speed through the basic plot/set-up of some cheerleaders have gone missing, police now looking for them and send a - slightly - youngish female cop undercover at the local school. There she meets some of the worst (and oldest!) cliched teenagers I've ever seen committed to film.
Weirdly, despite the lack of big names in the cast list, the acting itself isn't that bad, plus the film-stock itself if adequate and not grainy like other low budget horror flicks I've stumbled across on various streaming services. There are even a few well-written lines here and there.
But then there's the plot. I won't go into too much detail, but it's a - kind of - take on what was going on in the 'Hostel' franchise. That worked due to its off-the-beaten-path and isolated location. Here, you probably couldn't get away with that sort of thing with well-to-do middle class teenagers from central California (or wherever it's set). So you do have to suspend your disbelief quite a bit if you want to buy the overall premise.
As I say, this cut is just over an hour, so it won't take up much of your time. Once you get a measure for what's happening, you'll probably be able to guess every plot point pretty faithfully right up until the credits roll. Not the worst, just so odd that the film-makers felt the need to re-release it with a whole half an hour trimmed out. I wonder what I missed? I'm guessing not that much. But then I did make it to the end - a feat which I don't always manage when it comes to the mountains of horror films that have found themselves dumped on a streaming service.
Trace (2015)
A Familiar Haunting with Spotty Execution
'Trace' is a supernatural (I won't say 'horror' as there really isn't much that's particularly 'horrific' contained within the runtime!) film about electronic voice phenomena (EVP), where a group of generic and not particularly memorable musicians dabble in capturing spirits on tape. Unfortunately, their experimentation takes a dark turn, accidentally opening a demonic gateway and unleashing terror.
The premise doesn't offer anything new and you're probably better off watching 'Flatliners' from whenever the hell that was released. The idea of using technology to bridge the veil between worlds has potential, but here it doesn't offer we haven't seen before. However, 'Trace' relies heavily on familiar horror tropes. We get the expected jump scares, shadowy figures, and characters making questionable decisions in the face of danger.
While not entirely original, 'Trace' has decent enough actors and the plot doesn't drag (too much!). The practical effects used for the demonic entity are just about okay and not too computer generated, but they're nothing that you haven't seen done better around the year 2000 in either 'The Ring' or 'The Grudge.'
Sadly, the script doesn't quite deliver. The characters are fairly one-dimensional, and their motivations feel underdeveloped. The reliance on clichés can be predictable for seasoned horror viewers. You end up getting one hell of a middle-of-the-road experience that doesn't offer a long-term horror viewer anything new.
If you find this on a streaming service (and haven't seen many horror films) it'll give you a quick supernatural fix with a unique technological twist, but horror aficionados might find it a bit predictable.
Thirst (2015)
You've seen it all before, but it's watchable
"Thirst" (2015) attempts to blend the elements of science fiction and horror into a cohesive narrative but ultimately falls short of leaving a lasting impression. Directed by Greg Kiefer, this film explores a camp in the middle of nowhere where youngsters with criminal pasts are sent for re-education. Unfortunately, an alien has happened to land nearby and is pretty hungry (or should I say thirsty?).
However, the film struggles in its execution of plot and character development. The storyline feels disjointed at times, with pacing that fluctuates between sluggish and hurried. Key plot points are either glossed over or dragged out, leading to a lack of cohesion that leaves viewers detached from the unlikable characters.
Characterization is another weak spot. The cast, featuring a mix of seasoned actors and newcomers, delivers performances that range from passable to wooden. Unfortunately, the script doesn't provide enough depth or backstory to make the characters truly compelling or relatable. As a result, their fates fail to evoke the emotional investment that such a dire scenario should inspire.
The horror elements are hit-and-miss. At first I thought Marvel's 'Venom' had been employed to do a turn as the evil alien, but those where when the creature was seen in the dark. However, when it's viewed in the full glare of daylight, it comes more across like a piece of modern art with teeth. There are moments of genuine tension and eerie atmosphere, but they are interspersed with clichéd jump scares and predictable deaths for those 'bad' and unlikable characters.
"Thirst" does touch on important themes like survival, resource scarcity, and human nature under extreme conditions, but these ideas are not explored. "Thirst" doesn't offer anything new in terms of concept and its uneven storytelling and shallow character portrayals don't help. The monster itself is okay and does occasionally offer some visually striking moments and occasional thrills, it ultimately fails to rise above mediocrity. For fans of the genre, it might be worth a watch, but temper your expectations. This film quenches the thirst for post-apocalyptic horror only partially, leaving much to be desired.
The Gate (1987)
It gets going
I don't know how I missed this one, growing up in the eighties. With my love or horror and general appreciation of films like 'The Goonies' where a bunch of plucky underdog kids take on a far more powerful threat, 'The Gate' should have been well on my VHS Top Ten back in the day.
I have to say that for the most part I wasn't impressed. It's about a trio of kids (two young boys and an older sister) who accidentally open a portal (or 'gate' as I should probably refer to it as) to another dimension, allowing demons to flood into their house right on the weekend when their parents were away.
The first half dragged by and I seriously considered turning it off. Despite laughing at an almost unrecognisablly-young Stephen Dorff as the lead kid, I stuck with it and was actually pleased that I did. If I had to sum up the first half I'd say that nothing really happens. You can probably have the film on in the background and still know all you'll need to about the characters and general set-up. But perhaps worse still... for a horror movie (even one aimed more at a younger audience) there really isn't much threat, let alone danger or scares.
However, about the halfway mark things finally pick up. The creatures the kids eventually have to face are very nicely animated and, despite the obviously low budget, the film-makers do the very best with what they have to work with. And with the inclusion of some actual bad guys, the action hots up. There's even some inventive gore and possibly the most interesting 'kill' made utilising a Barbie doll that I've ever seen! Plus the climax involves the - now tried and tested - 'skybeam effect' long before any superhero movie stamped it into their climax.
I've seen a lot of people describe 'The Gate' as a 'cult classic.' I guess it is. I would imagine if I'd have watched it in the eighties then I'd be able to rely on a certain degree of nostalgia to make it even more enjoyable for me. However, as I didn't I'd have to say that it's certainly not a bad movie and has many plus points - it was just a pity it took half the movie to get there.