Review by Dan Skip Allen
Shudder has had a nice niche in the horror genre over the past decade. They've paved a path all their own in a genre but can be a bit hit-or-miss. During the horror renaissance of the last ten years, Shudder has popped up with many original films, some going to theaters and some directly to their streaming service. Hellbender is another one of their original films.
More than other genres, the horror genre has spawned new original voices such as James Wan, Air Aster, Robert Eggers, and the like. John and Zelda Adams are two new filmmakers who have created a unique vision of horror that is different from other horror films. They fall back on a few horror tropes, but the end product is distinctly different with less of a seasoned approach than the other filmmakers I've mentioned. Izzy (Zelda Adams) lives in a remote wooded area with her mother (Toby Poser). She is homeschooled and secluded away from other teens her age. While out exploring in the woods, she comes across a girl, Amber (Lulu Adams), sunbathing around a pool at a house. They become friends. This opens up new possibilities for this young girl who doesn't know anything outside her life, living with her mother, playing music in their band known as Hellbender (the title of the film), and eating strange things from the woods. The Adams family, not to be confused with the television family of the same name, creates a new vision that might have been touched on before but not in this way. It would be categorized as folk horror, gaining prominence lately but has been around forever. They focus on the visuals but lack overall acting ability. The two leads lack the experience to be seasoned veterans, and the same goes for the rest of the cast. The filmmakers lack the knowledge to get believable performances out of themselves, which doesn't translate to a very good film.
The visual style is an intriguing one by these new filmmakers. The scenery is lush and vibrant, but the story, set up at the beginning of the film, lacks originality. Films about witchcraft have been done before with much better results. These filmmakers should have spent their budget more wisely in acting classes. These performances are so wooden they pretty much take you out of the film. The story isn't enough to get past these bad performances.
The film's title has multiple meanings as well. Besides the band's name, it is also a term used to describe very special witches. Hellbenders live for a very long time, and the traits of one are passed down to another. In this case, mother to daughter. Zelda Adams takes this trope to the next level in the film. Had better actors been cast as this young woman, maybe it would be more believable. It's too bad that Hellbender had such bad performances by the entire cast. The film's visual style is a solid core that isn't built around well. I would have liked to see more of the film's subplots explored as well. This film is a mess, almost to the point of being laughable. Hellbender streams on Shudder beginning February 24. Rating: 1/5
0 Comments
Review by Camden Ferrell
Studio 666 is a new horror movie predominately featuring the legendary rock band Foo Fighters. It is directed by B.J. McDonnell and features some seasoned comedy actors alongside the band. While many people like the music of Foo Fighters, this movie doesn’t have nearly enough music to please anyone but the most die-hard fans of the band. It also is a poorly acted and written horror movie that doesn’t have much working in its favor.
Needing to write and record their 10th studio album, Foo Fighters decide to move into an Encino mansion to get inspired and finish it. However, once they arrive at this house, supernatural forces threaten their music and their lives. This is a silly premise, and it’s nothing special, but it could have worked if they emphasized what people love most about the band, which is obviously their music. From the start, the writing is quite poor. Its dialogue is forced and none of the jokes land properly. It tries to be quippy and enjoyable, but its script leaves a lot to be desired, and it doesn’t make the most of its premise. It focuses far too much on the supernatural elements of the movie rather than any musical moments. We don’t get to see even a single song played in its entirety which is a disappointment when watching a movie starring a musical group.
The acting is far from great, but this isn’t unexpected since the main cast consists mostly of non-actors. Regardless of how charismatic he has been in his career, front man Dave Grohl can’t carry this movie with his inconsistent and erratic performance. He doesn’t know how to deliver most of his lines, and all of his horror acting is overdone in a bad way. The rest of the band lacks a lot of natural emotion, and it comes off as terribly wooden throughout. In addition to the band, the movie features other actors like Will Forte and Whitney Cummings who also don’t do much to enhance the movie.
The only enjoyable part of the movie was the over-the-top blood and gore in its horror scenes, but it doesn’t do nearly enough to make up for the myriad of ways the movie underwhelms. It lacks emotion in its acting, writing, camera work, and execution. It’s under two hours, but it still feels too long from the start. While one wouldn’t expect a great movie from this, it’d be a lie to say the lack of effort wasn’t disappointing. Studio 666 is a movie for the biggest of Foo Fighters fans and not much else. The band’s musical talents do not translate to acting talent, and there isn’t much music to begin with in this film. It’s uninteresting, and it’s not as funny or scary as it wants to believe it is. Studio 666 is in theaters February 25. Rating: 2/5
Review by Paris Jade
In the years 2018 and '19, tragedy struck. Two Boeing 737 Max airplanes crashed into the ground, leaving no survivors. This had affected the entire world. Now in 2022, Netflix has released Downfall: The Case Against Boeing, directed by Rory Kennedy. This documentary investigates what exactly happened to those planes and who is responsible for the hundreds of lives lost within those five months.
This documentary will very much leave you in shock. It immediately drags you in by bringing family members who had lost their loved ones in the crashes. Already you know whose side this documentary is on, and you understand what story is about to be told. The pacing is perfect, and it has a great balance that is not too overwhelming with its grief. You will most definitely feel for these families, and in some scenes, it is very painful to watch, but it is amazing that these people can come on and talk about their loved ones. They share their stories, and the audience feels just a little more connected to them and a little more sympathetic than before.
As you come into the film, you are at square one with the rest of the world, wondering how this ever happened. The film does a great way of keeping a sense of mystery and slowly revealing what really happened while also keeping you interested. Of course, certain moments dragged on just a little too long, but it would always lead back to an answer that sometimes would be shocking to know. Nonetheless, the twists and turns of the film leave you wanting more knowledge of what really went down. Any questions you have at the beginning of the documentary will be answered by the end.
The cinematography for this film and the re-enactments of the plane crashes were a great addition to showing audiences how things actually happened. After finding evidence through a black box, the filmmakers were able to go through what really happened on those planes and translate it to the audience. They also use trial footage during the case against Boeing, where you find family members holding pictures of their loved ones up, which is truly a mournful sight to see. The footage chosen was thought out carefully and showed their storytelling skills. These crashes affected hundreds of people, which is why it is so important that their story is told. Downfall: The Case Against Boeing is out on Netflix now. Rating: 4/5
Review by Tatiana Miranda
Three years after the release and subsequent cancellation of the Netflix series Wu Assassins comes the feature-length sequel Fistful of Vengeance. The series follows Kai Jin (Iko Uwais), Lu Xin Lee (Lewis Tan), and Tommy Wah (Lawrence Kao) as they use martial arts and magical powers to defeat mystical entities threatening their otherwise ordinary lives. Fistful of Vengeance continues to follow the trio as they travel across Thailand looking for answers about the death of Tommy's sister, Jenny. It becomes quickly apparent what they are fighting against, as the film opens with an action scene, one of many that appear throughout the film.
Fistful of Vengeance's action scenes are one of the movie's only redeeming qualities, but they also prohibit it from offering insight into the characters and their motives. Like the original series, Fistful of Vengeance is primarily action, and the plot comes second. While the martial arts scenes are entertaining to watch and a testament to the talents of Iko Uwais and Lewis Tan, both talented martial artists, they are paired with below-average dialogue and plot points. The characterization in this film consists of quick quips and tragic backstories that present as half-thought-out reasons for a character's actions (as seen with Preeya, a secondary character and love interest to Tommy). Not even the most masterful action scenes can distract from the lack of plot, and they especially look dull when the audience has no stakes or attachments to the characters involved in the fight scenes. The lack of characterization and personality between the various characters make it difficult for a viewer to connect with the team and worry about whether they will win or not.
One of the other primary downfalls to this movie is that it is a sequel to a series, and while it does its best to clue the audience in on the history of the three main characters, it is done in a way that is more annoying than intriguing. For example, the movie begins with an action scene paired with Tommy talking to a woman about how Kai's powers came to be. It's a device used to catch the audience up on what happened in the series, but it is done in quite possibly one of the least exciting ways imaginable.
The explanation is then paired later with another by character William Pan, played by Jason Tobin, to demonstrate the primary threat of the story. Because the film is chock-full of action scenes, it only allows time for quick explanations for plot points that would otherwise take a while to uncover. Overall, while Fistful of Vengeance is a good display of interesting martial arts choreography and an ode to the beauty of Thailand, it falls short as the movie seconds plot to action and thrills, much to its detriment. Fistful of Vengeance is now streaming on Netflix. Rating: 2/5
Review by Camden Ferrell
Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a sequel to the iconic 1974 horror film. Despite being the ninth film in this franchise, it predominately serves as a direct sequel to the original film. This is the second feature film from director David Blue Garcia, who previously helmed 2018’s Tejano. Although not as passionately made as the original film, this sequel amps up the violence and gore to create a follow-up that is thrilling from start to finish.
In the 1970s, the killer known as Leatherface brutally attacked and killed a group of teenagers. Many decades have passed since then, and he has returned to terrorize a group of people who are attempting to revitalize an abandoned Texas town. This attempt to rebuild the city is being led by Melody and Dante, who are accompanied by their sister and fiancé respectively. This is a simple set-up that doesn’t overcomplicate anything or try anything new. This allows the film to remain short and to the point which works greatly in its favor. The writing is sufficient for what it’s trying to achieve. It has all of the beats you can expect from a horror film, and it makes sure to pay homage to the original film in more than one way. The attempt to modernize certain aspects of the film and character don’t always land the way its intended, but these problems aren’t very noticeable in the grand scheme of things. This movie is led mostly by Sarah Yarkin who plays Melody and Elsie Fisher who plays her younger sister Lila. Both of them do a great job as horror characters and fit well into their respective archetypes. The rest of the cast is fine, but don’t do much to stand out.
This sequel differs from the original in many ways. On a purely superficial level, this movie obviously lacks the low-budget charm that made the original so enjoyable. The times have changed, and the style in which this sequel is shot is a reflection of that. While its more polished nature takes away some of the raw grit and energy from the original, it is still clear that this was made by a filmmaker with nothing but respect and admiration for what came before.
Another difference is that this movie, having a larger budget and more resources, is able to go absolutely insane with its violence. The many kills in this movie are accompanied with plenty of blood and gore, and it’s an absolute blast when it goes into overdrive. Very few movies take full advantage of their premise like this one. While the subtle kills of the original work well, this movie lives by its exhilarating and gratuitous violence. I think this movie is great for long time fans, but it’s also an accessible film for horror novices. It’s a short movie that doesn’t overstay its welcome, and even if some parts are predictable, there are bound to be a few moments that truly shock audiences. Texas Chainsaw Massacre is an absolute blast, and it’s a great follow-up to Tobe Hooper’s timeless classic. It’s definitely a film for older teens and adults only as some might find its violence too extreme. However, this is a crowd-pleasing sequel that may very well be one of the most exciting horror movies of 2022. Texas Chainsaw Massacre is on Netflix February 18. Rating: 4/5
Review by Sean Boelman
There are two main types of stories that make for great documentaries: ones that have some timely connection and ones that are so unique they are downright fascinating. Lisa Hurwitz’s The Automat is the latter, an absolutely adorable film about a subject that is more compelling than you would expect.
The movie investigates the short-lived phenomenon that was the automat, a commissary-style restaurant that served fresh-cooked meals through vending machines. And while it does amount to little more than a nostalgia trip, there’s something unusually charming about these people reminiscing about such an obscure topic. One of the fatal flaws of Hurwitz’s film is that she fails to pick a person through whom we are experiencing the story. Is this the story of the creators of the automat, or the people who frequented it as a child? The most successful documentaries about institutions of the past have chosen one or the other, but Hurwitz tries to do both, and it feels somewhat distant as a result. The runtime of the documentary is under an hour and twenty minutes, and it goes by pretty quickly. Perhaps the best thing about the movie is that it doesn’t take itself too seriously. Hurwitz recognizes that the story she’s telling isn’t anything weighty, and so it plays out in a bouncy and lighthearted way.
There are some interesting themes that the film could have explored about the mechanization of American society, but the movie doesn’t really explore it that much. Although people frequently mention that the automat was innovative and ahead of its time, it’s just vague praise without any real context.
Hurwitz was able to get some surprising interviews for her film. Why are Mel Brooks, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, and Colin Powell in this movie about automated restaurants? They each have a childhood story about the institution, but it’s more accurately an attempt to get some star power for the movie. The film also has some sections in which Hurwitz explores the idea of making her movie about the automat, but this meta filmmaking is too underdeveloped to leave much of an impact. That said, Mel Brooks did write a song for the film, and the collaboration between him and Hurwitz is pretty interesting. The Automat is an adorable little documentary with a story that’s more intriguing than it probably should be. It’s nice to see a wholesome movie like this that doesn’t deal with anything urgent or troubling, but is instead just a bunch of people talking about something they immensely respect. The Automat is now in theaters. Rating: 3.5/5 Review by Adam Donato Channing Tatum really peaked in the early to mid 2010s. It’s great to see him back again in a leading role. Not only is Tatum starring alongside his canine companion, but he is also co-directing the movie as well. He's moving up in the world! While Tatum may have lost some of his star power, Dog is sure to have a built in audience as this story is not only relatable to dog owners, but also to veterans alike. Hot off of Valentine’s Day weekend, Dog is sure to face some formidable opposition at the box office in the form of Uncharted. Is Dog good enough to make an impact at the box office? Dog movies are usually very cliché. People assume if you’ve seen one dog movie then you’ve seen them all. This movie is no exception, but it generally is a crowd pleaser. Nothing crazy special, but it gets the job done. The emotional beats work very well and there’s a cute dog running around the entire movie. What more can you ask for with something like this? A strong lead actor to sell the movie? That just might be the best part. Tatum doesn’t have the best range when it comes to leading men, but he fits so perfectly into that douchebag role. He’s a foul-mouthed alcoholic who is desperate to rejoin the military despite his medical conditions. His character starts in such an unsafe and unlikable place, which is a perfect setup for his relationship with this former military canine. This dog may be wild, but he just might be able to save Tatum by making him be honest with himself and stop fronting. This bond is formed over a road-trip down the West Coast so they can go to the funeral of the dog’s previous handler. The early Valentine’s Day screening for this movie was sure to quench the thirst of the lonely hearted as Tatum is still in peak physical condition. He holds his own during the emotional scenes and his antics, despite how immoral they are, come across as charming thanks to his great comedic timing. Not to mention, Tatum shares directorial duties for this movie, further cementing the idea that this was a project he was passionate about. It’s interesting to think about how this movie will be perceived politically. If one didn’t see the trailer, they may be unaware about how much about the military this movie is. It is more geared towards the impact of serving on veterans post-deployment. Tatum has a flurry of psychological and physical issues due to his time serving and he struggles with them throughout the entire movie. Since it’s about the military, it’s sure to be in favor of the conservative crowd. The negative impacts of serving are not as pronounced as the feeling of companionship and brotherhood with others who experienced similar trauma from serving. There’s also a whole section in the heart of Portland where a lot of liberal terms are thrown around. The recreational drug usage is surprising in such a family-oriented movie. Some parents may find that they didn’t take the PG-13 rating seriously enough.
Dog delivers with a movie that has more to offer than just having a cute dog in it. Channing Tatum reminds audiences that he has the personality to lead a movie. This movie provides an emotional message about how to come back to normal life after enduring service. At a crisp ninety minute run time, Dog is certainly worth the watch. Dog opens in theaters on February 18. Rating: 3/5
Review by Camden Ferrell
King Knight is the fifth feature film from independent writer and director Richard Bates Jr. It had its premiere in the latter half of 2021 where it played at the Fantasia International Film Festival. This movie marks the second collaboration between Bates and Matthew Gray Gubler after 2014’s Suburban Gothic. This is a movie that ultimately fails to achieve its desired effect because it is distractingly quirky for the sake of being quirky.
Thorn is the high priest of a small coven of new age witches. Along with his partner and high priestess, Willow, he aims to lead his coven to the best of his abilities. However, after a secret from his past comes to light, the lives of those in the coven is thrown into a spiral as they all must go on a personal journey of self-discovery. This premise is outlandish and intentionally so, and it sets a rather eccentric stage to tell its story on. A story such as this one can be told as long as its quirkiness is a reasonable attribute of the film and not its defining characteristic. Unfortunately, its script doesn’t do much in the name of subtlety. It is very in your face from the start, and again, while this is definitely intentional, it doesn’t make the movie any funnier. It features some over the top dialogue and narration that subvert the earnestness of its message. It wants to be taken seriously as a comedy, but it doesn’t really have much enjoyable humor, and it only succeeds in dampening the overall finished product of the film.
One of the few highlights of the movie is its performances. The movie is led by Matthew Gray Gubler who is a reliably charming actor in his own right. Despite the less than stellar material he was given for this movie, he still managed to bring his typical charisma to the role. His supporting cast wasn’t able to make the most of what they were given, so they all sadly pale in comparison to Gubler.
The movie was supposed to emphasize the importance of self-discovery, but it’s such a cliché message, that it needs to be supplemented by something fresh and unique. While the movie attempts to do that through their quirky coven premise, it just unfortunately doesn’t work. The movie comes and goes, and it doesn’t really have a consistent flow or tone, and it seems like it’s trying to juggle too much at once. It has its quirks, but they don’t serve any purpose, and it boils down to just another basic story of self-discovery. King Knight might appeal to fans of Gubler or of quirky comedies, but some viewers might find this film to be needlessly eccentric. Props to Bates for doing something different and attempting to imbue his own taste and style into the movie, but it just doesn’t work for me on any level. This is a film that is mostly worth watching for Gubler and not much else. King Knight is in select theaters and on VOD February 17. Rating: 2.5/5
Review by Dan Skip Allen
Video game movies haven't done that well with fans or critics in the past, except Sonic the Hedgehog in 2020. Uncharted has been rumored to become a film for a while. Fans of the game have been critical of the casting of Tom Holland and Mark Wahlberg because of their ages. After seeing the movie, I think their ages didn't matter, and they seemed very well cast to me. This film is much better if you don't know or have ever played the game.
The film is based on the characters Nathan Drake (Holland) and Victor "Sully" Sullivan (Wahlberg). They are treasure hunters. Sully rounds up Drake because of his relationship with his brother Sam (Rudy Pankow), who left when he was a teenager. Sully needs Nathan's help to uncover two gold crosses that will lead to a much bigger treasure that will make them both rich. Uncharted is a mix of Indiana Jones and The Da Vinci Code. It has a lot of globe-trotting adventure while also having a bunch of clue solving and intellectual discussions from the pair of leads. The treasure once belonged to Ferdinand Magellan and his heirs, the Moncada family, specifically Santiago Moncada (Antonio Banderas), who would stop at nothing to get the treasure back. The two leads of the film, Holland and Wahlberg, have to fight off two formidable women in their hopes to rescue the treasure. Chloe Frazer (Sophia Ali) is a reluctant ally of the pair at times, and Braddock (Tati Gabrielle) is a ruthless killer trying to get the treasure for her employer. Not having played any of the games before watching this film gave me a different perspective than most. I didn't have a preconceived notion of what this film should be before seeing it. I went in completely fresh. That was a good thing for me! The film has vibes of some great IPs from the past while also being a fun adventure film with great banter and chemistry from its two leads. It had a few big set pieces like a big action movie would have. And it has some back and forth dialogue from Holland and Wahlberg that makes it light and funny.
The film has a charm that makes you laugh at times, but it also has some major set pieces to keep you on the edge of your seat. One involving raising water was quite breathtaking. The fight scenes were excellent as well. With any big action film also comes visual effects. In this film, they were seamless. I didn't notice any scenes where the visual effects threw me out of the film. The opening sequence, which the director Ruben Fleischer went back to a couple of times during the film, was incredible. Yes, parts of it are in the trailer but seeing the entire sequence and how it was resolved within the context of the film was quite rewarding. It was a magnificent scene.
With any film like this comes verisimilitude. Does this story make sense? The script can be nonsensical in adventure films. I am here to say the story was well thought out and had a lot of common sense built into it by Rafe Judkins, Art Marcum, and others. The games have stories to them, so the film has to have a believable story to follow along. This one has a very entertaining story. Along with the script comes a fantastic score by Ramin Djawadi. This score was loud and boisterous and created an atmosphere of tension while also bringing a flair of adventure, similar to the Indiana Jones theme by John Williams. This score was superb! Uncharted was a lot of fun, and the chemistry between Holland and Wahlberg was fantastic. They may have been miscast in the eyes of some, but not me. I think having younger actors playing these two iconic video game characters is good because it will make them available for sequels in the future. This film doesn't need sequels, though, because it stands on its own as a throwback to classic adventure films of the 80s. It channels the Indiana Jones films with the action scenes, score, and banter between its two leads. Uncharted is the perfect film to break up the February doldrums. Uncharted hits theaters on February 18. Rating: 3.5/5
Review by Sean Boelman
Greg Daniels and Steve Carell’s Space Force was initially greenlit when President Trump first began pushing the initiative of the space-bound military branch, and while the political satire isn’t nearly as timely, that may be for the better. Less funny but arguably more well-written, this second season is an improvement even if it isn’t what its creators’ fans are used to.
The film follows the Space Force scientists and officers as they deal with the aftermath of the crisis at the end of the first season. Whereas the first season was primarily a workplace comedy, this one is much more focused on the characters’ arcs and their poignancy. The result is a show that still has some laughs and is surprisingly touching. This season is only seven episodes long compared to the first season’s ten, but the streamlined narrative is definitely an improvement. The show cuts out a lot of the dead weight characters and expands upon some others that were more compelling but previously less developed. Because of this, the show feels much more relatable instead of being distantly farcical. One of the most interesting things about this season of the show is that it doesn’t introduce new characters. Usually, there are some eccentric new additions to the ensemble who end up stealing the show, but Daniels and Carrell focus on the usual suspects. It was a risk for them to double down on goodwill from an original that was met with muted reception, but it works well.
Steve Carrell is again doing his schtick here, albeit in a more serious way. But it’s the rest of the cast that makes this something special. Jimmy O. Yang was a funny supporting character last season, but his role is expanded here into something that really uses his comedic talents. Tawny Newsome is also a standout, having the most emotionally-resonant of the roles in the series.
There are some interesting ideas here about accountability in the US government, but they aren’t fully developed. The show lost a lot of its teeth when the real-life military organization didn’t materialize as strongly as it may have been expected to. So whereas the first season banked on the ridiculousness of reality, this has to create something else entirely. This season is also done at a much less ambitious scale than the first, but that also works to its advantage. It’s nice to see a political satire that isn’t all about gloom and doom, but actually has some hope and optimism for what good can be done if the right people get together to make a difference in this country. Season two of Space Force may not be all that hilarious, but it makes up for its lack of laughs with its other strengths. It’s unclear what Daniels and Carrell are going to do with the series from here, though, as we become even more detached from its relevance. Space Force streams on Netflix beginning February 18. All seven episodes reviewed. Rating: 4.5/5 |
Archives
February 2025
Authors
All
|