Directed by Adam Egypt Mortimer [Other horror films: Holidays (2016, segment ‘New Year’s Eve’), Daniel Isn’t Real (2019)]
Throughout the first thirty minutes, I was deeply enjoying this movie. A bullied kid finally strikes back, and gets sent to a new-age type anger management camp in the middle of the desert. Alas, he can’t escape bullies there either, as three alpha-male dicks start picking on him. It’s when he runs into a restricted portion of the camp, angry at the bullies, wanting them dead, when the spirit of a former patient begins to get revenge for the both of them.
Partially, this might help explain my overall lukewarm opinion of the film as a whole. Most of the people who were killed were bullies, or covered up for bullies, and thus, I had little to no pity for them. An alpha-male dick that makes people feel miserable gets killed, and the audience is supposed to care? Why? Like, good riddance, right?
That’s just part of it, though. The movie really feels as though it’s unraveling once you get past the thirty minute mark, and while the rest of the film isn’t entirely horrendous, it reeks of mediocrity. I didn’t much care for the design of the ghost, nor did I care for much of the story past a certain point. Honestly, it felt like Friend Request (2016) all over again, only (and here’s the bad part) a little bit worse.
The production quality was good all around, and while the gore wasn’t anything special, I don’t think it was horrible either. The main characters, played by Ronen Rubinstein and Grace Phipps, did a really good job, and hell, there are rather moving scenes and discussions of bullying throughout the film. If they threw out some of the elements in the second half of the film, I think it could have been a lot better. As it is, Some Kind of Hate doesn’t live up to the potential the beginning of the film promises. While it’s a somewhat interesting story, the approach didn’t work for me, and overall, it’s just a below average flick.
Directed by André Øvredal [Other horror films: Trolljegeren (2010), Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (2019), The Last Voyage of the Demeter (2023)]
Directed by André Øvredal, who was behind the cult favorite Trollhunter, this movie has a high quality production, great actors (Brian Cox and Emile Hirsch playing the main characters, father and son), and pretty suspenseful scenes. A moderately unique plot, also.
Prior to beginning the film, I didn’t much know what to expect. I was thinking maybe it’d be a murder/mystery-type thing playing over the course of a month or so. What it actually is happens to be a supernatural journey over a single night, culminating in a downer of an ending, for the most part. Truth be told, I think the film, as good as the first 2/3 of the movie was, ended up being a mixed bag.
The good: Brian Cox and Emile Hirsch play a very compelling father and son. Their scenes together, for the most part, are very solid, and some even moving. It feels as though there’s a real relationship there, and I loved that. Also, some of the implications of the ending are cool. I’d rather not say any specifics, but things that happen in the film aren’t as obvious as they may otherwise seem. Also what has to be praised is the tense, claustrophobic feel of the first 50 minutes. Were there jump scares thrown in? Yes, and those bothered me, but the core of the first 2/3 of the film were great.
Onto the bad, we have a few elements, one being the aforementioned jump scares. I wish that mainstream horror films didn’t rely on these paper-thin jump scares in order to rev up the audience. Now, this film wasn’t nearly as bad as others, perhaps because Øvredal’s not been responsible for many mainstream flicks, but it was still prevalent throughout the film (including the last split second, which I find increasingly annoying).
There’s also the character of Emma, who was Austin’s (Hirsch) girlfriend. Now depending on your perception of the film, her actions seemed rather foolish. And the aftereffects of her actions didn’t seem all that important, in truth. I just don’t think she added much of anything, and that’s not a great thing. At the same time, given the fact she had less than 15 minutes of screen time, perhaps that can be excused.
The last thing, though, is arguably debatable. In my opinion, I don’t think enough, if any, concrete answers were provided. There were some potentially accurate conjectures, but one theory (according to IMDb, the most credible one) just doesn’t make sense to me. I will say, though, that the antagonist in this film was quite unique, and I certainly didn’t expect it to go that route. The Autopsy of Jane Doe was an interesting supernatural horror film – it had some great elements (the relationship between father and son) and interesting choices.
The movie didn’t fall flat at the end; if that’s the impression I’m giving, it’s unintentional. But the final thirty minutes are certainly more an average path than the first fifty. For it’s flaws, the movie’s not atrocious by any means, and is, when all is said and done, above average. Not by a lot, but it is.
Directed by Tom DeNucci [Other horror films: Self Storage (2013), Army of the Damned (2013)]
Almost Mercy isn’t your typical horror film. Narrated by our main character Emily, it chronicles her life growing up with her best friend Jackson, the difficulties they’ve both had, and how messed up they become.
It’s an interesting mix of real-world drama and sarcastic, almost manic at points, narration by Emily, as she lets the audience know about how she first meant Jackson, or how, after being raped, the authorities did nothing because the rapists were “important to the community.” While the first forty minutes has Emily focusing on Jackson and what he went through, it turns more toward Emily after an aborted school shooting.
Honestly, there’s not much horror going on for the first fifty minutes of so, save an instance or two of blood spill. It’s more a dramatic comedy, with Emily, while going through a shitty, disconnected life, goes on about Jackson, her screwed up mother, and the creeps who make the town they live in a terrible place. I can imagine that some would call a majority of the film both meandering and boring, not to mention disjointed in tone. One second, a boy is mocked and terrorized by bullies, the next, Emily’s joking about some aspect or another of her life. That said, I rather liked how the film played out.
While at times I thought the narration was a bit too comedic, I thought we really got to learn about and even care about Emily and Jackson. When Jackson is expelled from school, you can feel for him. When Emily’s mother attempts suicide, you can feel her disdain for her father, as he walked out on them. It felt real, in short. The film takes a turn in the final thirty minutes or so, and it was a logical, satisfactory one.
Let’s talk actors and actresses. Young Emily, played by Eva Senerchia, did a really good job, being as young as she is, showing us the dispassionate life that sometimes a young kid can go through. Danielle Guldin, who played grown-up Emily, did a fantastic job in her role and narration. Grown-up Jackson, played by Jesse Dufault, did pretty good also, though more focus was spent on Emily (which makes sense, as the film was through her point-of-view). Kane Hodder and Bill Moseley, playing a high school coach and a church pastor, respectively, are good in their roles.
Though it takes a while to get there, the gore is also quite solid, and the killing spree at the end was on point, if not occasionally riddled with unnecessary comedic commentary. Almost Mercy seems to be the type of film that will turn off some horror fans. It’s not conventional, it’s a bit enthusiastic in it’s presentation, and the “twist” might not do much for some. Personally, though, despite it’s few shortcomings, I thought it was a great quirky film. It’s not for everyone, but it was for me.
Directed by Benni Diez [Other horror films: Galaxy of Horrors (2017, segment ‘Kingz’)]
What could have been a moderately enjoyable comedic horror romp, Stung came out far more stale than I’d have expected.
Giving credit where credit is due, the two main actors and actresses, being Matt O’Leary and Jessica Cook, were cute, and moderately adorable, together. They had some decently awkward exchanges that are always fun (well, not for those participating, anyways), and for the most part, felt real to me.
About everything else fell flat, though – even before the atrocious shift an hour or so into the movie, plenty of parts felt far more filler than substance. Hell, some parts even felt boring, which isn’t quite what I feel this movie was aiming for. Other portions felt generic, and I’m not entirely clear whatsoever on what Lance Henriksen’s purpose was, insofar as his character was concerned.
But then you hit the hour mark, and it just gets worse, culminating in the two characters making love in the back of an ambulance when, surprise surprise, hundreds of giant wasps start attacking. And cut to black. So not much of a conclusion, and honestly, pretty underwhelming all-in-all. I also didn’t care whatsoever for Clifton Collins Jr.’s character, but the less said about that aspect of the film, the better. I’d take Mosquito (1994) over this any day.
Directed by Andy Muschietti [Other horror films: Mama (2013), It Chapter Two (2019)]
I’m a giant fan of the novel It – I read it annually. It’s all-around a fantastic book. I have great memories of the television mini-series from 1990, but let’s be honest: it certainly was lacking most of the great things the book brought us. And so when I went to go see this in theaters when it initially came out, I had my fingers crossed that we’d get a better adaptation. And though It was not without flaws, we basically did.
Let’s talk about the main seven kids, first. All actors did a good job, but the biggest kudos go to Finn Wolfhard (Richie), Jaeden Lieberher (Bill), Wyatt Oleff (Stan), and Sophia Lewis (Beverly). Richie was a crowd-pleaser, and for good reason. He had a plethora of fantastic lines, hilarious quips, and was overall a great character. Bill was as solid as you’d hope he’d be, and Lieberher did well to show the pain of losing his younger brother. Stan was a favorite of mine from the book, and Oleff played his careful nature (that bike stand scene gets a kick out of me) perfectly. And as for Lewis? Does wonderful with this new version of Beverly, who is so different from the mini-series.
While Mike, Ben, and Eddie were well-acted, I had a few gripes with some of their storylines. Mike no longer being the historian, that role instead going to Ben (in reality, both characters sort of filled the role in the book to a certain extent) really reduced the potency of Mike’s character, There wasn’t even a race-element, that we saw, of Henry’s bullying him. Mike just seemed like he had nothing much to do throughout the film. Ben played his lovesick puppy act well, but really, he was more a punching bag for both Henry and Pennywise than anything else. Eddie (Jack Dylan Grazer) was well-done, and while I prefer the four listed above, he was the fifth best-done kid.
Bill Skarsgård brought Pennywise to life in a whole new way. I’m not going to say that Curry didn’t do a good job. But I will say what another individual said about comparing the two: Curry seemed like an evil clown, moderately charming, even, and not much more. Skarsgård had moments that made him seem alien (the beginning with George, where his smile and laughter suddenly died, for instance), and he honestly felt more threatening than most of Curry’s performance. Playing more like a kid, also, was a great addition.
Patrick needed more scenes to show the extent of his insanity (such as in the book), and honestly, I thought all of the bullies, Henry included, needed more characterization. Showing Henry’s father embarrassing him once in front his friends doesn’t do it for me.
While there were certainly a high amount of jump scares, and occasionally some not-so-great CGI, there were some standout scenes I really liked, such as Stan’s encounter with Pennywise near the end, Georgie’s encounter at the beginning, and the projector scene (overall). The Neibolt House sequences were certainly enjoyable also.
As for drawbacks, I have a few: the run-time, even at two hours and 15 minutes, was too short, some portions feeling rushed. I feel as though another 30 minutes, to carve out a few more characters, such as Patrick or Henry, wouldn’t have gone amiss. What they did with Mike’s character just felt off, as they gave most of what he was known for to Ben, which gave Ben a bit more to do, but really left Mike in the dust. I do have to mention also that I dislike that they moved the children’s portion from the late 50’s to the late 80’s. I get why they did it, and it came out alright, but I still don’t particularly like it.
Some of the classic scenes of the book, such as Richie and Bill’s journey to Neibolt House, Mike’s encounter with the giant bird, and the Killer Eye in the sewers, were nowhere to be seen. Hell, the Smokehole would have been extremely cool also, and bringing up the Ritual of Chud should have been mandatory. Exploring more of Derry’s past too, would have been welcomed.
Overall, though, I think that It was a fine adaptation. Not as great as could be done – we’d probably need an HBO mini-series to get something even close – but very enjoyable indeed.
8.5/10
This was one of the movies covered on Fight Evil’s podcast, episode #12. Listen below as Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss this one.
Directed by John R. Leonetti [Other horror films: Annabelle (2014), Wish Upon (2017), The Silence (2019)]
The only reason that I sought this movie out was due to Elizabeth Henstridge, who plays one of the main characters in Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, a show I rather enjoy. And as it turns out, aside from Henstridge, this movie doesn’t have much going for it. Dramatizing the events of the murder of Sharon Tate and company (purely hinted at until the end, for some unknown reason), Wolves at the Door is almost utterly run-of-the-mill. If you’ve seen Ils (2006) or The Strangers (2008), or hell, even The Purge (2013), you’ve seen a more enthralling and tense movie than this one.
Adam Campbell (Wojciech) has some decent scenes, and if you like the ascetic of someone dragging a sledgehammer across the ground, well, Wolves at the Door has that also. But aside from Elizabeth Henstridge, who does a decent job despite the shallow script, the best I can say is that occasionally good 60’s songs play, such as ‘She’s Not There’ by The Zombies and ‘Lil’ Red Riding Hood’ by Sam the Sham and the Pharaohs. There’s nothing else though – this movie is otherwise empty. And while I wasn’t fond of it that first time I saw it, I’m even less fond of it now. Not much here to recommend, folks.
Directed by Nicholas Ortiz [Other horror films: N/A]
This came as a surprise on a few different levels. Firstly, I was amazed I could find the film at all – on IMDb, it had just seven ratings [Edit: it now has nine, so it hasn’t moved much], which doesn’t generally an easy find make. But seconds later, boom – it’s on YouTube, put up by the production company. Needless to say, I was pleased.
Siodmak is a simple story, but told in a more complex way. A serial killer has been hunting in New York City for decades, and the only one who believes in his existence is a video blogger, Nick LaRosa, whom no one takes seriously. But with the help of NYPD officer Angel Vega, who has had a tragic run-in with the serial killer, they soon discover some things weren’t meant to be pried into. This is interspersed with scenes a day later, after the events that transpired, and focus on a medical examiner’s examination of the killer, and learning about what brought him here. It’s a more unique way to tell the story, and overall, I think it worked.
While the production was low, I think that most scenes were shot pretty well, and some in unique ways (a sequence near the end, with a reddish-auburn tint, comes to mind). As far as actors go, Masha Mendieta (Vega), Kit Lang (LaRosa), Russell Jordan (Dr. Feliz, Vega’s psychiatrist), Krista Chandlee (the medical examiner), Madison Idoate Candelario (Vega’s niece), and Michael Valentine (the killer) all stood out, doing a solid job.
Jordan, as the psychiatrist, had an almost Colin Salmon-feel to him. Mendieta and Lang, despite their short screen time together, really worked well, and had some of those small human elements that sometimes go amiss in bigger budget films. The killer, known as the New York Ripper, had a Michael Myers aura to him, helped by his featureless mask, which I rather enjoyed.
The music present was decent also – near the end, a record player can be heard playing hits such as “I Wanna Be Loved By You” (famously lip synced by Baby in House of 1000 Corpses) and “Hush, Hush, Hush (Here Comes The Boogie Man)” (from the credits of Jeepers Creepers), which was a nice touch.
For as much as I liked it, though, a few problems need be addressed, one being the run-time. Siodmak is one hour and fifty minutes long (or 110 minutes) – it’s not a short movie, easy to digest. Siodmak makes you work for it. Many of the scenes are interesting, but after the third flashback or the finale taking the last thirty-five minutes, it might come across as a bit much.
There were also a few unanswered questions, not to mention what came across to me as a Hollywood ending which I was both disappointed but somewhat unsurprised by. A few audio issues were present, but that wasn’t that much a deterrent. For what gore there was, I thought it was decent, though the focus of Siodmak wasn’t gore, but the story told.
This movie was an interesting find. Was it an amazing movie? Not really. The story, while told in an interesting manner, wasn’t overly original. That said, Siodmak is one lower-budget film that should have gotten more attention. Some surprising kills also stand out, a few I certainly wasn’t expecting. It’s a decent, above-average film, if you can get through the lengthy run-time.
Directed by Anthony Fankhauser [Other horror films: Tsunami Beach Club (2008), 8213: Gacy House (2010), Shadow People (2011)]
This is a very generic film about military men getting trapped in a lost world – a crater in which dinosaurs exist still.
Truth be told, I’ve not much to say about this. The CGI dinosaurs were some of the worst I’ve seen. The CGI blood was even more cringe worthy. Acting and story was nothing worth writing home about whatsoever. Lastly, most of the characters were thoroughly unlikable – in fact, I’m hard-pressed coming up with one I even sort of liked, and there weren’t that many characters in the movie to begin with.
Jurassic Attack can be fun at times – I mean, seeing terribly made CGI dinosaurs chase after terrible actors, how can you not have fun, especially with alcohol and weed? If I had to describe it in a short phrase, though, I’d simply call it overly generic. And seeing it twice was definitely too much.
This surprised me. I’ve not heard of this film before I watched it – it’s one of those post-2005 horror films that slipped through my fingers. Which makes sense, really – supernatural movies, especially ghost films, have never been my favorite. But Ghosts Don’t Exist was a pretty decent, if not a bit generic, movie.
Acting was okay all around – nothing too special. I did rather enjoy Josh Davidson’s character (a rather arrogant skeptic), and the lead, an emotionally-unstable ghost hunter, was also well-played by Phillip Roebuck. The story, like I alluded to earlier, isn’t overly original: it comes across as a ghost story, but some elements certainly make us question if everything is as it seems. About three-fourths into the film, actually, a plot twist rears it’s head, and I have to admit, I rather liked it. It was reminiscent of a 2004 Japanese film I rather enjoy, truth be told.
I liked the movie before the twist came about, but afterwards, it just got better. Problematically, though, the movie runs for an hour and 40 minutes, which, while was mostly okay, still seemed a bit lengthy. Ten to fifteen minutes could have been cut out, and we’d probably still be fine. Regardless, while generic in some ways, the last ten-ish minutes were rather atypical – I certainly didn’t see it coming, especially from a modern horror film. Ghosts Don’t Exist isn’t amazing, but it did surprise me, and I liked it well enough.
Directed by James Nguyen [Other horror films: Birdemic 2: The Resurrection (2013)]
I’ve not seen this film before, but I’ve long heard it was a doozy, and boy, is it ever.
I won’t go into all that’s wrong about this movie. The meandering first half, focusing on a boring individuals’ romantic life for the first 48 minutes. The clearly computer-animated birds, and the fact that they somehow have the ability to dive bomb into buildings and blow up. The stilted acting and atrocious dialogue. The minute-long scene of people clapping. The stock music on repeat. The prolonged ending. About everything that could go wrong in a movie went wrong here.
I’ll say one positive thing about this movie: the actress who played Natalie, Whitney Moore, was pretty attractive. She couldn’t act worth shit, but she did do far better than Alan Bagh, who gave one of the worst performances I’ve seen in a while. And the constant talking about going green, and solar panels, and preventing global warming. Obviously, I’m all for these things, but come on, tone it down. This movie is not helping the case to go green whatsoever.
Aside from the pretty Moore, this movie is an embarrassment. Definitely a movie to watch with a bunch of friends while drunk or high, but that’s about it. Still, as bad as it is, you will definitely be amused, which is why it’s not getting a lower rating.
Jiggy's Horror Corner 