Tag Archives: Film Review

Incident in a Ghostland: A Flawed and Challenging Psychological Horror Film

Posted on by
2
Advertisements

Controversial director Pascal Laugier, the creative force behind the divisive Martyrs, is dividing audiences and critics again with his latest release. A Canadian-French production, Incident in a Ghostland, had a limited theatrical release. But before the studio even released Ghostland, it was courting controversy. One of its stars, an on-set accident seriously disfigured actress Taylor Hickson. Following its initial release, a number of critics signaled out Laugier’s latest effort. Specifically, critics called out Ghostland for its perceived misogynistic and transphobic content. How much of this criticism is valid? And does Incident in a Ghostland offer scares and maybe some subtext alongside its controversy?

IMPORTANT – THIS REVIEW IS SPOILER-FREE

Synopsis

Sixteen years ago, bestselling horror author Elizabeth Keller and her mother and sister, Vera, experienced a traumatic event. Shortly after arriving at their deceased aunt’s abandoned home, two serial killers invade the home, subjecting the women to a brutal attack. Years later Elizabeth receives a desperate and cryptic phone call from her sister. Reluctantly, she returns to their family home where the memories of that night still haunt her family.

Incident in a Ghostland Offers a Disturbing and, Challenging, Story

It would be easy to dismiss Laugier as a misogynistic hack if his work wasn’t so intriguing. Similar to Martyrs, Laugier, who also wrote the screenplay, never takes his story in a predictable direction. Simply put, there nothing formulaic about the storytelling itself. After an early twist, Incident in a Ghostland delivers another curveball at the halfway point that completely changes the movie. That is, Laugier forces you to reconsider what happened in the previous 40 to 45 minutes. Even in its closing moments, Incident in a Ghostland raises more questions. It’s layered and complex storytelling that engages even as it also repulses.

It’s layered and complex storytelling that engages even as it also repulses.

And then there are the very obvious problems with the movie. Many of the criticisms leveled at Laugier are legitimate. In addition to complaints about misogyny, critics have accused Incident in a Ghostland of transphobia in its portrayal of one of the movie’s two killers. While this killer plays only a small role in the overall story, this is essentially the thrust of the criticism. Neither killer is fleshed out or elevated beyond being a ‘really bad person’. Laugier fails to give his villains motive or any sort of discernible characteristic. Moreover, horror has a long history of characterizing transgendered and gay characters as evil – from Dressed to Kill to Sleepaway Camp. While those movies can argue that their creators made them in a different time, Ghostland has no excuse. It’s a completely unnecessary aspect of the movie that adds nothing.

Incident in a Ghostland’s Violence Raises Difficult Questions

On one hand, Incident in a Ghostland falls short of Martyrs‘ onscreen brutality. Nevertheless, Incident in a Ghostland is an absolutely violent movie and, more importantly, its violence is uncompromising. Laugier doesn’t peddle in the cartoonish violence characteristic of most slashers. Here, the violence is grim and nasty, not unlike Laugier’s past work in the New French Extremity. Much if not all of this violence is directed at young women. This is also a movie filled with doll imagery wherein its killers literally dress their victims up as dolls. Maybe Laugier wanted to make some commentary on the objectification of women. If so, Incident in a Ghostland undoes it own message with its own excessive violence. Here is a movie that begs the question – hos much is too much?

…Incident in a Ghostland is an absolutely violent movie and, more importantly, its violence is uncompromising.

Where Incident in a Ghostland distinguishes itself from formulaic slashers is its relationship between the movie’s sisters. Initially, Taylor Hickson’s ‘Vera’ is a thoroughly unlikable character. She’s the typical surly teenager that is mean and petty to her younger sister. But if much of Ghostland is focused on violence against women, a significant part of its story is the sisters’ bond ]] and the strength it affords them. As Laugier ratchets up the tension – an aspect of psychological horror at which he is quite adept – it’s the bond between the sisters that gives them the strength to fight back. Of course this part of the movie would have landed with a thud if not for the consistently compelling performances given by both Hickson and Emilia Jones.

Incident in a Ghostland Proves to be a Challenging Film To Review or Recommend

Bottom line, Incident in a Ghostland proves to be a challenging movie to review or recommend. With so many twists, it’s hard to discuss the movie without spoiling anything. And while he’s no stranger to controversy, Laugier again invites more concerns in the era of #MeToo and #TimesUp. Undoubtedly, the movie’s brutal subject matter and violence will put off casual horror fans. As for more hardcore horror enthusiasts, Incident in a Ghostland is both flawed and still very much compelling, tense, and at times quite scary. For people who prefer their horror films to be hardcore and intense, Ghostland is worth investing the time.

THE PROFESSOR’S FINAL GRADE: B-

Deep Blue Sea 2: Something Fishy Off the Starboard Bow

Posted on by
3
Advertisements

If you were a certain age in the 1990’s, you remember Deep Blue Sea. Released in the summer of 1999, the Renny Harlin-directed shark thriller was a modest box office hit earning just over $73 million on a $60 million budget. Its premise of genetic experiments creating intelligent killer sharks made for delightfully silly B-movie summer fun. In spite of these obvious B-movie roots, Deep Blue Sea reeled in an impressive cast, which included Samuel L. Jackson, Thomas Jane, and Stellan Skarsgard. Fans will also attest to the fact that Deep Blue Sea has the best shark kill scene … ever. Nearly 20 years later, Warner Bros Home Entertainment and SyFy have partnered to distribute a sequel, Deep Blue Sea 2.

Synopsis

Like its predecessor, Deep Blue Sea 2 (DBS2) is set on a remote ocean under-water research facility funded by scientist and billionaire, Carl Durant. Fearful that the human race is being slowly replaced by Artificial Intelligence (AI), Durant is funding genetic experiments on sharks. See Durant believes that these experiments will expand human intelligence. A side-effect of Durant’s unethical studies is an unexpected increase in the sharks’ intelligence. Following the arrival of shark expert and conservationist Misty Calhoun, ‘Bella’ and the other sharks rebel. Now the research team finds themselves trapped in the flooding lab.

If It Worked Once …

First, DBS2 is NOT a sequel; it’s a straight-up remake of the original Deep Blue Sea. If the story sounds familiar that’s because the ‘sequel’ follows the same basic plot. In fact, the movie operates like a connect-the-dots colouring book. Yet somehow not one, but three, writers are credited with the story. Inexplicably, they struggled to introduce anything beyond superficial changes. Instead of mako sharks, the ‘sequel’ uses bull sharks. Shark conservationist Calhoun repeatedly assures us bull sharks are far more aggressive than most sharks. This pretty much represents the extent of Deep Blue Sea 2’s originality.

… the movie operates like a connect-the-dots colouring book.

It’s too bad because the opening scene offers some promise. Director Darin Scott shows some flair in those first few minutes that almost justify the movie’s existence. After escaping the research facility, the smart sharks attack illegal shark fin fishermen rather than a boat of partying teens. It’s a nice moment of poetic justice that promises some dark humour. Scott even manages to build a little suspense here. Sadly, it’s all downhill from this point onward. There are a few delightful scenes of shark mayhem. One scene even puts an admittedly clever twist on Samuel L. Jackson’s death scene from the original. But for the most part, Deep Blue Sea 2 registers as a dull rehash.

Deep Blue Sea 2 Sinks With Odd Story Direction

[MINOR SPOILERS FOLLOW IN THIS SECTION]

Scott and company do steer the sequel/remake in a slightly different direction following the sharks’ revolt. But it’s a rather odd narrative choice that undermines what probably attracted most people to the movie in the first place. Once the lab starts flooding, it’s not the much-hyped bull sharks that stalk the cast. Instead, “Bella’s” baby mini-sharks stalk the research team through the sinking lab.

In most shark films, size actually does matter.

The story misdirection ultimately sinks the movie. In shark films, size actually does matter. After all, they did need a bigger boat in Jaws. The Meg’s entire marketing campaign focused on the sheer size of its monster. If I wanted to watch small man-eating fish I would have just re-watched Piranha or Piranha 3D. Notwithstanding a a few book-ending scenes, Deep Blue Sea 2 under-utilizes the larger bull sharks.

Poor CGI Effects Are No Replacement for Rubber Sharks

I don’t care what Richard Dreyfuss thinks. In my opinion, Jaws’ shark effects are head and shoulders above anything put on film. That being said, Deep Blue Sea 2’s CGI shark effects are pretty weak. Generally, the sharks – big and small – are one step above the quality of effects you would find in the standard SyFy films. In fact, I’d argue that the effects here are a big step backwards from the original Deep Blue Sea. Given the premise, it’s hard for the underwhelming effects to not kill any mood or tension. Part of the problem here is that Deep Blue Sea 2 tries too hard to play it straight. If Scott had committed more to the film’s silly premise, like its predecessor or the Sharknado series, the cheap effects might have been a selling point.

If Scott had committed more to the film’s silly premise, like its predecessor or the Sharknado series, the cheap effects might have been a selling point.

Consistent with the special effects, the acting performances are pretty mediocre. Danielle Savre is fine as ‘Misty Calhoun’ but most of the actors in DBS2 come across as pretty wooden. A few performances might easily be confused for more poor CGI effects. Only Michael Beach, as the ruthless Carl Durant, turns in a genuinely good performance. Maybe Beach thought he was acting in a different movie.

Deep Blue Sea 2 is a Cheap Cash-In on Shark Renaissance

The idea of a Deep Blue Sea sequel so far removed from the original seemed odd. In spite of a promising trailer, Deep Blue Sea 2 confirms that it was a cheap and cynical cash-in on the success of Shark Week and recent films like The Shallows and 47 Meters Down. It takes itself too seriously to embrace its B-film roots. But it lacks the acting, special effects, and scares to be a good, ‘serious’ film. Everything about it is a big step down from the original Deep Blue Sea. In fact, the rotten effects negate one of the primary reasons that younger film-goers might watch it. If you’re in the mood for a fun shark film, I would go with the original over this ‘sequel-remake’ hybrid.

THE PROFESSOR’S FINAL GRADE: D+

It’s Garbage Day: Celebrating the Sheer Awfulness of Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2

Posted on by
4
Advertisements

When you think of bad sequels, a few titles spring to mind. Superman IV: The Quest for Peace. The Exorcist II: The Heretic. Batman and Robin. Troll 2 is so infamously bad, it got its own documentary. But Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2 gives all of these titles a run for their money. A sequel to the movie ‘they tried to stop you from seeing’ – Silent Night, Deadly Night – … this Christmas slasher took recycling to a whole new level. Today, it’s best known for giving birth to one of the greatest gif’s of all time. There’s no doubt that this is a bad movie. The only question is whether this Christmas turkey rises to the level of ‘so bad, it’s good.’

Synopsis

Several years have passed since police shot down the Santa Claus killer, Billy Caldwell. Now his younger brother, Ricky, is institutionalized in a forensic psychiatric facility following his own brutal killing spree. As he recounts his brother’s troubles to psychiatrist Dr. Henry Bloom, Ricky reveals he’s no less depraved than his brother. When Ricky escapes the institutions, he seek revenge on the one person he holds accountable for both his and Billy’s crimes – Mother Superior.

A Flashback Within a Flashback…

Let’s get one thing straight right off the bat. Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2 is a really, really bad movie. Yet two things save this inept sequel from being unwatchable. First, it’s a hilariously incompetent movie that becomes unintentionally hilarious as it progresses. Second, nearly half of the movie is just made up of footage from the first movie. Yes, that’s right. Most of Part 2 is a literal re-hashing of Part 1.


….nearly half of the movie is just made up of footage from the first movie. Yes, that’s right. Most of Part 2 is a literal re-hashing of Part 1.

Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2 spends its first 30 to 40 minutes reviewing the events of the first movie through Ricky’s therapy session. In some amazing logical acrobatics, Ricky recounts events that happened to Billy, not him. In fact, Ricky can even remember things that Billy himself didn’t experience. Ever hear of something called infantile amnesia? Don’t worry, neither have the makers of this movie. But Ricky somehow recalls things that happened when he was a baby. Arguably, the best of these flashbacks occurs when Ricky goes to the movies with his girlfriend, and watches a scene from the first movie. Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2 was ‘meta’ before Wes Craven’s Scream.

On Second Thought, Stick With The Flashbacks

As ridiculous and borderline offensive as Part 2’s use of old footage feels, it’s probably the best part of the movie. No, the original Silent Night, Deadly Night wasn’t a classic. But it was at times a brutally effective slice of ‘70’s splatter exploitation film-making. In contrast, Part 2 is inept in any and every way imaginable. When characters fall to the ground, it looks like staged scenes from a high school Christmas concert.

Most of the sequel’s budget must have been squandered on the most inexplicable car explosion in movie history.

Most of the sequel’s limited budget must have been squandered on the most inexplicable car explosion in movie history. Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2 is a cheapo-looking movie. There are a couple of nasty and effective death scenes including the only use of an umbrella in a horror movie that I can recall. Aside from these scenes, the sequel suffers from comparison with the original Silent Night … and just about any other horror movie. 

And the Oscar Goes To…

Not Eric Freeman. There’s bad acting, and then there’s what Freeman does in Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2. Is it the thing Freeman does with his eyebrows? Could it be the lack of doing anything with the rest of his body? This is the very definition of stiff acting. Maybe it’s Freeman’s over-the-top delivery? Take your pick – Freeman gives one of the worst performances in horror film history. But it’s not all bad. Freeman is so bad that eventually his acting transcends the movie and becomes a form of surreal humour. Let’s not forget that Freeman gifted us all with his ‘Garbage Day’ line delivery. To date, it remains one of the greatest gif’s of all time.

Happy Garbage Day, Everyone

To this very day, I still vividly recall watching Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2 on VHS with friends. We were understandably outraged with the cheap use of footage from the first movie. But when we saw the ‘Garbage Day’ scene, we knew we had just witnessed something special. With one line of dialogue, Part 2 wrote its ticket into the annals of bad movie history. Do yourself a favour and unwrap Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2 for your Christmas viewing. And a Happy Garbage Day, Everyone!

THE FINAL VERDICT: SO BAD, IT’S GOOD

Would You Rather: The World’s Most Awkward Dinner Party

Posted on by
2
Advertisements

Before Blumhouse was adapting teen party games like Truth or Dare and Seven in Heaven, IFC Films released Would You Rather in 2012. At the time of its release, the low-budget indie horror film didn’t make much of an impact. It certainly wasn’t due to a lack of relevancy. The movie’s story about a millionaire exploiting down-on-their-luck characters was only a year removed from Occupy Wall Street. Since its release, Would You Rather has hung out on Netflix for a couple of years, looking for an audience.

Synopsis

Unemployed Iris struggles to carve out a living and care for her sick younger brother. But her luck looks to a take turn when she’s offered the chance to win money by eccentric philanthropist, Shepard Lambrick. The only catch is that she has to play a parlour game at dinner party with several strangers. After some harmless pleasantries, Iris and the other guests quickly learn that Lambrick’s game of ‘Would You Rather’ can only have one winner.

The Right Concept, But The Wrong Format

On the one hand, Would You Rather seemed perfectly timed to strike a nerve. We were only a few years removed from of the worst economic crises in history. Public outrage with the ‘one-percenters’ was intensifying. Yet in spite of this built-in opportunity for cutting subtext, Would You Rather feels disconnected. Director David Guy Levy’s decision to adopt a ‘Torture Porn’ approach to the material is part of the problem. By the time 2012 rolled around, the ‘Torture Porn’ cycle had long since faded away. Horror fans had moved on to found-footage and haunted house throwbacks.

…Would You Rather never fully embraces the nihilistic violence of ‘Torture Porn.’

In addition, Would You Rather never fully embraces the nihilistic violence of ‘Torture Porn.’ Though the movie threatens all manner of sadistic torture, there’s nothing committed to the screen that’s likely to shock horror fans. A character may be forced to cut his own eyeball, but you won’t see any explicit violence or gore. Lucio Fulci and Mario Bava, this is not.

Poor Execution Hurts Would You Rather

Would You Rather is clearly minimalist filmmaking. The majority of the action unfolds in a single setting. There’s virtually no music score to help with atmosphere and tension. Not much of a budget was set aside for make-up effects. Yet none of these things should have been enough to sink the movie. But they certainly were enough to expose the movie’s problems with execution. Simply put, Levy doesn’t show much innovation in staging the movie’s action. Levy films scenes that you know should feel tense and uncomfortable with all the flair of a public service announcement. There’s a dullness to the most of the movie. It’s watchable but never compelling.

Underdeveloped Characters and Miscasting Hurt

Aside from Brittany Snow’s ‘Iris’, Would Your Rather offers few relatable characters. Given the premise, this is a serious misstep from screenwriter Steffen Schlachtenhaufen. A movie about the wealthy taking advantage of the poor would be much more effective if the audience could actually identify with somebody on screen. Instead Schlachtenhaufen’s screenplay evens to build most of its characters from simplistic keywords. ‘Elderly woman in wheelchair’ and ‘recovering alcoholic’ is as much depth as you can expect. Other characters don’t seem to have much reason for being in the movie at all.

Odd casting choices only serve to further undo the movie’s paper–thin characters.

Odd casting choices only serve to further undo the movie’s paper-thin characters . Snow is perfectly serviceable, and Gotham’s Robin Lord Taylor is fine as a petulant and spoiled one-percenter. Canadian television fans will recognize Robb Wells from cult-classic The Trailer Park Boys. He’s a Canadian institution as Ricky, but feels out of place in this movie. It’s similarly jarring to see My Name is Earl’s Eddie Steeples here. Would You Rather shamefully wastes experienced character actor John Heard . Horror fans may not like to hear it, but even Jeffrey Combs doesn’t feel right in his role as the sadistic Lambrick.

Would You Rather is an Adequate Time Waster

Ultimately, Would You Rather never approaches being a truly bad movie. Words like ‘servicable’ and ‘fine’ readily come to mind. Everything chugs along while maintaining your interest. Nevertheless, Would You Rather is never rises above being an adequate time-waster. With the premise it boasted, Levy left money on the table here. Somewhere in Would You Rather was a critical and subversive horror film that could have left audiences unsettled.

THE PROFESSOR’S FINAL GRADE: C

Death House: Ambitious But Flawed Horror Homage

Posted on by
4
Advertisements

Death House has been one of the more talked about indie horror movies in recent memory. This is no small part due to the sheer number of horror alumni in the cast. Fans have described Death House as ‘The Expendables’ of horror movies. It’s a virtual ‘who’s who’ of horror wrapped up in vintage 80’s style. Do you know what else it’s wrapped in? A purely batshit crazy story likely to give the recent Nicolas Cage effort, Mandy, a run for its money.

Synopsis

A remote and secretive prison called Death House grants two FBI agents – Boon and Novak – an exclusive tour. The subterranean facility houses the most depraved and violent individuals on nine levels. But the inmates may not be the only monsters in Death House. Within its walls, medical staff conduct brutal and unethical experiments in the hopes of unlocking the secrets of their residents. When a power outage frees all of Death House’s inmates, Boon and Novak must fight their way from level to level. Waiting for them on the Ninth Level are the ‘Five Evils’, the facility’s most feared residents.

Death House is a Narrative Nightmare

From a pure storytelling perspective, Death House is almost inexplicably indescribable. Trust me, the above synopsis barely scratches the surface. Gunnar Hansen of Texas Chainsaw Massacre fame, along with Harrison Smith, wrote the screenplay. What they put together is a ‘dog’s breakfast’ of occasionally delightful off-the-wall ideas. In fact, there’s no shortage of ideas in Death House. There’s doctors performing unethical surgeries on homeless people to make them look like killers’ past victims. Cast toss around a lot of pseudo-scientific jargon about virtual reality, hallucinogenic drugs, and rehabilitation. Tony Todd bookends the movie as some sort of ‘blood farmer.’ Don’t ask about Bill Mosely’s third act soliloquy that puts technology and social media alongside notions of ‘good and evil.’

Instead, Death House struggles to get all these admittedly cool concepts to gel into a coherent story.

A shortage of intriguing ideas is not a problem. Instead, Death House struggles to get all these admittedly cool concepts to gel into a coherent story. For the first 30 odd minutes, Death House jumps from idea to idea with no firm storytelling base for the audience. Much of first half is seemingly devoted to downloading all these ideas onto the audience. The problematic storytelling approach is exacerbated by what feels like choppy editing. At times, it felt like I had missed things, but going back and re-watching didn’t help. Some plot details must have been left on the editing room floor. Ultimately, Death House works best as an aesthetic experience as opposed to a cohesive story.

Death House Substitutes Violence For Scares

If Death House is a crammed and confusing story, it’s equally a visual assault on the senses. Director Harrison Smith’s homage to 80’s action/horror violence should satisfy hardcore horror fans. The focus here is not on creepy atmosphere or scares, but rather body mutilating gore. Along with some brutal stabbings and throat-slicing, Harrison delivers on some intestine-dripping mutilations. One of the movie’s more memorable images includes a trio of fleshless creatures gorging on victims. Poor lighting in some scenes reduces the visceral impact of some of this gore.

Death House re-kindles that VHS–feel of low-budget 80’s horror-actioneers.

Where Death House falls a little short is its ability to maintain a surrealist tone. Movies like Suspiria, Phantasmh, and Carnival of Souls could shirk storytelling demands because they so effectively captured the feeling of a nightmare. Each of these movies maintained a sense of dreamlike dread over their runtimes. Death House re-kindles that VHS–feel of low-budget 80’s horror-actioneers. Nevertheless, it never really taps into enough of a nightmarish surrealism to justify its often incoherent story.

Death House Boasts a ‘Hall of Fame’ Horror Cast

Arguably, Death House has garnered a lot of attention for the sheer volume of recognizable horror actors in the cast. Aside from the absence of a few big names, most notably Robert Englund, you’ll recognize a lot of faces if you’ve watched more than a few horror movies in the last few decades. Rob Zombie alumni Bill Moseley and Sid Haig show up. Michael Berryman (The Hills Have Eyes), Tony Todd (Candyman), and Vernon Wells (Commando) are present and accounted for. Several ‘Scream Queens’ turn up including Barbara Crampton (Re-Animator), Dee Wallace (The Howling), Felissa Rose (Sleepaway Camp), and Camille Keaton (I Spit on Your Grave). Even Troma Entertainment founder Lloyd Kaufman joins in on the fun.

Though Death House boasts an impressive cast of horror regulars, it’s a a stretch to coin it ‘The Expendables’ of horror. Most of these horror actors make only brief appearances in the movie. Some of these appearances don’t amount to much more than a ‘blink and you’ll miss it’ cameo. By and large, none of these actors are connected or interact in any story-driven way. While Kane Hodder is given a more significant role as the principal antagonist, Death House largely belongs to Cody Longo and Cortney Palm, as Agents Novak and Boon, respectively.

Death House May Find Cult Status in the Future

Death House isn’t a bad movie, and it’s certainly one I desperately wanted to love, Truth be told, it’s an ambitious movie that probably falls short of the cult status it desperately wants. There’s a lot of fun to be had with this B-movie pastiche. For starters, it’s an absolute blast to see so many familiar faces in one horror movie. While much of the movie is incoherent, there’s no denying that some of the ‘off-the-wall’ craziness is intriguing. Perhaps Death House will age well into midnight movie status.

THE PROFESSOR’S FINAL GRADE: C+

Bonne Nourriture – The Ravenous a Tasty Zombie Movie

Posted on by
1
Advertisements

The Walking Dead’s ratings may be dropping, but French-Canadian horror movie, The Ravenous, shows there’s still life in the zombie genre. Over 50 years ago, George A Romero re-imagined the zombie. Thirty-five years later, Danny Boyle sparked new interest in the sub-genre with 28 Days Later. When The Walking Dead premiered in 2010, the zombie was firmly entrenched in contemporary pop culture. French-Canadian writer and director, Robin Aubert debuted his take on the ‘living dead’, The Ravenous, at the Toronto International Film Festival in 2017. While critics praised The Ravenous, mainstream audiences missed out. Fortunately, Netflix has recently added this Canadian hidden gem for its Netflix and Chills.

Synopsis

Following an unexplained outbreak that has decimated the population, pockets of survivors struggle to get by day-by-day. Mistrust, fear, and paranoia now rule. Most survivors have retreated from large cities to remote forests in the hopes of evading hordes of the infected. Now several survivors, including a young girl, band together when they learn they’re caught in the infected’s pathway. As hoarders of infected close in, the small group desperately searches for refuge.

The Ravenous is Beautiful Carnage

With The Ravenous, Aubert has shot a beautiful and meditative horror movie. The rural, mist-covered Quebec countryside is gorgeously captured by Aubert with several well-framed, wide-angle shots throughout the film. In the more quiet moments, the film’s setting serves as almost a second character. As a result, The Ravenous is rich in atmpospher, characterized by a pervasive ominous feeling. On one hand, Aubert’s pacing is often deliberate and reflective. Yet there’s still several incredibly tense moments that show Aubert has a knack for scares. One scene where survivors must creep past infected in a field slowly builds to almost unbearable levels of dread. After all, this is a zombie movie Aubert doesn’t disappoint with the undead gore. While the violence is sparse, it’s effective for movie’s relatively smaller budget.

The Ravenous a Very Human Zombie Film

Like the best zombie movies, The Ravenous is more focused on its human characters than its horde of infected. In contrast to The Walking Dead, Aubert’s screenplay is less interested in the cruel and ugly side of humanity. Aubert’s characters struggle with their humanity. In one scene, a character remarks, “When you wake up in the morning and the first thing you do is kill someone, you know it’s a brand new world”. Yet Aubert allows these characters to maintain their humanity. Each character is afforded an arc that allows the audience to identify with and feel something when they’re endangered.

“When you wake up in the morning and the first thing you do is kill someone, you know it’s a brand new world”.

In fact, much of the movie revolves around characters’ need to reconcile lost lives. The Ravenous paints a picture of a fractured world where people struggle to make new connections. All of the acting performances are exceptional. Audiences outside of Canada may not recognize any of the actors. But this isn’t a bad thing – you won’t be distracted by famous faces. Aubert does include one recurring character gag that doesn’t really fit with the tone of the movie, but it’s a minor complaint.

Zombies as Social Allegory

Over the last decade or so, horror has come close to reaching a saturation point with zombies. There probably aren’t many ways left to re-imagine the undead. Last year alone, studious released The Cured, Hostile, Day of the Dead: Bloodline, Feral, Overlord, and Cargo. The Ravenous most directly borrows from Danny Boyle’s 28 Days Later with its rapid, fast-moving zombies. Similar to many of the movies listed above, The Ravenous has more on its mind than just zombies and gore.

First, Aubert wisely avoids offering any explanations for the zombie outbreak. In addition, he manages to provide an interesting tweak to the formula. The Ravenous suggests that the undead maintain some elements of conscious awareness. In a few scenes, for example, the infected congregate around towers of chairs and other possessions that they have seemingly arranged, staring aimlessly. No expository dialogue is offered leaving viewers to consider their own interpretations. Aubert clearly had something interesting to say when he made The Ravenous.

Don’t Let Subtitles Deter You

There are a lot of zombie films out there for horror fans, but The Ravenous is an excellent example of how the undead can keep lurching into movie theatres. Aubert’s film is a quiet but genuinely tense zombie offering that is well-acted and beautifully shot. Some potential viewers may opt to skip out due to the subtitles but you’re only cheating yourself out of a fantastic movie. The Ravenous is a zombie film that will have you thinking long after the final credits have finished rolling, which is the best type of zombie film.

THE PROFESSOR’S FINAL GRADE: A

Creep: A Found-Footage Gem For Horror Fans

Posted on by
Reply
Advertisements

Blame The Blair Witch Project, and its shaky camera work. But once The Paranormal Activity franchise took off, horror filmmakers increasingly turned to the found-footage format. Between 2010 and 2015, the horror genre churned out dozens of found-footage titles including The Den, Unfriended, and even a Blair Witch sequel/reboot. One of the better found-footage offerings released during this time period was small indie flick, Creep. Blumhouse produced the micro-budgeted thriller out of its subsidiary, Blumhouse Tilt. The Orchard, which falls under Sony Entertain, released the movie to Netflix where horror fans can still find it.

Synopsis

Videographer Aaron drives to a secluded cabin in response to an odd ad for a day’s work. At the cabin, Aaron meets Josef, an eccentric man, who claims to be dying for cancer. Josef wants Aaron to film a ‘day in the life’ to leave behind for his unborn son, ‘Buddy’. Though Josef initially seems odd, Aaron considers him harmless and opts to stick out the job. But as the day goes on, Josef demonstrates increasingly unnerving behaviour. By nighttime, Aaron finds himself alone with man who may be more dangerous then he initially believed.

Creep May Be One of the Scariest Movies This Decade

Creep is a damn scary movie. It’s all the more impressive considering the small nature of the production. No special effects or onscreen gore. No musical score. This is a movie focused on the interactions between two characters. And it absolutely works. At a mere 77 minutes, director Patrick Brice wastes little time in ‘creeping’ out the audience. While there are a few jump scares that get overused, Brice largely relies on psychological tension. He quickly introduces Josef’s idiosyncratic ticks and ratchets things up from odd to unnerving. There’s Josef’s ‘tubbie time’ session that elicits discomfort. But the ante gets increased fast when Josef discloses the true origins of his ‘Peachfuzz’ mask. It’s good horror movie-making when a just a character’s story can send chills up your spine. When Josef blocks Aaron’s exist wearing the mask, Brice dials up the suspense to an almost unbearable level.

Even with such a short runtime, Creep runs into some pacing problems at the movie’s midpoint. Once Aaron is removed from the cabin, Creep slows down a little. That is, Brice loses some of that sustained, unbearable tension that the cabin setting possessed. Fortunately, Creep still finds ways to get under your skin. By and large, Creep avoids over-the-top horror tropes in favour of more subtle approaches to horror. Some horror fans may find the movie’s conclusion to be a little too unlikely. It certainly requires a great deal of stupidity from one character and a lot of good fortune for the titular ‘creep’. Nevertheless, Creep’s ending is in keeping with the movie’s tone – it leaves you feeling unsettled.

Mark Duplass is a Perfect ‘Creep’

Mark Duplass, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Brice, makes Creep work. With such a stripped down movie, Creep isn’t nearly as effective without Duplass. First, Duplass casts aside all the standard Hollywood psychopath tropes. Instead, Duplass opts for a more nuanced approach to the role. Initially, Duplass’ ‘Josef’ is a merely eccentric, uninhibited character who almost seems scatterbrained. When Duplass turns on the more menacing aspects of the character, it’s still a more subtle approach. Josef switches from warm to distant to dangerous at a moment’s notice. And it’s these understated aspects of Duplass’ performance that make Josef one of the scarier horror movie antagonists in years.

With such a stripped down movie, Creep isn’t nearly as effective without Duplass.

Writer and director Patrick Brice also plays the hapless Aaron. Outside of Creep, Brice has no acting experience. Fortunately, Creep doesn’t require much of Aaron other than to play off of Duplass’ ‘Josef’. In this regard, Brice admirably captures an ‘everyman’ response to the madness around him. If Creep has a problem, it’s Aaron’s inexplicable willingness to stick around and keep filming long after the warning signs have escalated. But these are problems with most found-footage movies. And poor character decisions are a hallmark of horror movies.

Creep One of the Better Found-Footage Horror Movies

Just when you thought the found-footage movie was all played out, Creep came along and illustrated how well the approach could still work. Not only does Creep stand out among found-footage horror, it’s arguably one of the better horror movies released this decade. Followed by an equally impressive sequel, rumors are swirling that we may even get Creep 3. Keep your fingers crossed for what may turn out to be one of the better horror franchises in recent memory.

THE PROFESSOR’S FINAL GRADE: A

The Head Hunter: A Cut Above Most Indie Horror

Posted on by
Reply
Advertisements

Vikings have enjoyed a recent cultural renaissance courtesy of The History Channel’s epics series. Likewise, Game of Thrones has proven the crossover appeal of fantasy-based medieval storylines. Now director Jordan Downey’s Viking-monster mashup, The Head Hunter, is available on select VOD-platforms.

Synopsis

A lone medieval warrior scours mist-covered lands for the monster that killed his daughter. His wall is covered with the spiked severed heads of other monsters he’s crossed paths with on his quest. There’s room on his wall for one more head. And only one monster remains.

The Head Hunter is Smart Independent Horror

The Head Hunter is an independent fantasy-horror movie that never betrays its low budget. Simply put, director Jordan Downey innovates to create an economical movie experience. At a mere 72 minutes, The Head Hunter is a one-man show with minimal dialogue. Its story is streamlined – a man wakes and sleeps, hunting any far-off cry in the hopes it’s the monster responsbile for his daugher’s death. No expository dialogue, no superfluous subplots.

No expository dialogue, no superfluous subplots.

For most of the movie, Downey never shows you the ‘Father’ fighting any monster. Instead, The Head Hunter shows you the aftermath of the battles. That is, Downey offers only glimpses of ‘The Father’s’ grotesque wounds and severed monster heads. Some horror fans may find this approach frustrating. But it’s clever and economical. Rather than ‘telling you’ or over-exposing the movie’s limitations, this horror-fantasy allows the audience to use its imagination. In addition, Downey shows enough to allow the audience to invest and piece together The Head Hunter’s nihilistic conclusion. And the movie does deliver its showdown between ‘The Father’ and the monster.

Lush Cinematography and Atmosphere Define The Head Hunter

In spite of its low-budget roots, The Head Hunter is a gorgeous looking movie. Cinematographer Kevin Stewart brings the movie’s lush mountains and woodlands to life. Most importantly, Stewart’s camera shots work in tandem with Downey’s film-making to invest The Head Hunter with a haunting atmosphere. Though it’s a fantasy world of monsters, The Head Hunter has a lived in feel that makes everything feel believable.

Rather Downey uses POV-shots and shadows to stage a tense, drawn-out hunt between ‘The Father’ and the monster.

Perhaps The Hunter Hunter’s most impressive achievement is the suspense and stakes achieved by its climax. On the one hand, Downey still doesn’t ‘show’ much in the movie’s final moments. Don’t expect a CGI-enhanced showdown. Rather Downey uses POV-shots and shadows to stage a tense, drawn-out hunt between ‘The Father’ and the monster. While the effects are limited, Downey uses them in such a sparing way as to never underwhelm. And the movie’s ending somehow manages to feel satisfying and grim at the same time.

The Head Hunter Never Feels ‘Small’

Not everyone will appreciate The Head Hunter. For film-goers expecting large-scale CGI mayhem, they’ll have to wait for Godzilla: King of Monsters. But indie horror fans will find lots to appreciate and love here. Downey’s atmospheric and economical approach to the material works perfectly with the movie’s brisk length. Similarly, the lived-in world and grounded approach to the story’s fantasy elements coalesce with the overall mood. It’s a grim Master’s Class on low-budget horror-fantasy filmmaking.

THE PROFESSOR’S FINAL GRADE: B+