Full Moon Reviews - Horror, Sci-Fi, Action, B-Movies

Homepage  Xml - Vorschau mit Bildern

Lisa Frankenstein (2024)
DIRECTED BYZelda WilliamsSTARRINGKathryn Newton - Lisa SwallowsCole Sprouse - The CreatureLiza Soberano - Taffy SwallowsHenry Eikenberry - Michael TrentJoe Chrest - Dale SwallowsCarla Cugino - Janet SwallowsGenre - Horror/Romance/Comedy/Supernatural/ZombiesRunning Time - 101 MinutesPLOTIn 1989, a misunderstood teenager has a high school crush — who just happens to be a handsome corpse! After a set of playfully horrific circumstances bring him back to life, the two embark on a murderous journey to find love, happiness…and a few missing body parts along the way.REVIEWWhile I think this film tries a bit too hard to be a cult film in about five to ten years like a HEATHERS or even a JENNIFER’S BODY, 2024’s LISA FRANKENSTEIN still manages to mostly be a fun time despite its uneven tone and lackluster final act that falls apart in every way. While the narrative doesn’t always work and doesn’t really capitalize on the Frankenstein concept all the way, Diablo Cody’s script is what one would expect from it - amusing quips, some memorable off-the-wall dialogue, and a sense of fun even if the comedy doesn’t land like she would want it to. The characters are all quirky and live in their own 1980s universe, making the film watchable despite not getting much out of it besides nostalgia for that time.I was expecting more of a Frankenstein type of story, like 2002’s MAY for example, but a bit more lighthearted. Instead, LISA FRANKENSTEIN is less a horror film but more of a zombie rom-com for teens and young adults. While I think 2013’s WARM BODIES handles this kind of tone better, LISA FRANKENSTEIN does have interesting character arcs and twists [as predictable as they are] that keep it somewhat engaging for its 101-minute runtime. Watching Lisa transform from a mousey and grieving teen to a goth princess who enjoys the power of murder to give her Creature love interest body parts he’s missing since he died centuries prior is a fun time and brings a lot of life to what could have been a one-note narrative. While I wish the film had more tension and some darker moments of making one feel uncomfortable, the rom-com aspect [which could have been stronger] still manages to satisfy due to the chemistry between the two main actors.Zelda Williams’ direction [her first feature, by the way] is hit-and-miss. When Williams wants to be dynamic and show some visual flair, mainly through fantasy sequences that really add a ton to the story, it makes me interested in what Williams could really do with a better script in her next feature. When things get a bit slower, the film is not as visually impressive but still shot well enough to leave a small impression. The lighting, in particular, is used really well. In particular, the scenes involving a tanning bed in a garage really make great use of neon colors that enhance the 1989 setting. Plus, I thought the use of certain songs - like When In Rome’s “The Promise” and Kathryn Newton’s take on REO Speedwagon’s “Can’t Fight This Feeling” are visualized really well and put a smile on my face. Zelda Williams' first film isn’t a total winner, but it does prove she has a voice and it’ll be interesting to see what she takes on next.What really saves LISA FRANKENSTEIN is the cast. I think this film has Kathryn Newton’s best performance as Lisa Swallows, an awkward teen who just grows more confident with power as the film rolls along. I liked her a lot in FREAKY and thought she was just okay in ANT-MAN & THE WASP: QUANTUMANIA, but Newton really showcases her talent here. She’s always game for anything, using her big eyes and facial expressions to give a lot of depth to a character that could have just been a cliche. I would like to see her do more like this one in the future because she does have some nice comic timing.Cole Sprouse is also very good as the Creature. He has a harder role to pull off since he barely has any lines of dialogue and mainly has to give a physical performance to convey what the character is going through as he’s revived from the dead and starts to have a life again with Lisa. Sprouse and Newton have great chemistry despite the lack of dialogue, making you root for them within this strange and quirky world they live in.The only other actors of any note are Liza Soberano and Carla Cugino. Soberano plays Lisa’s stepsister Taffy, a popular girl who could have been totally mean to the more introverted and less popular Lisa. Instead, Soberano plays Taffy as a bubbly delight with some great dialogue that fleshes out what should have been a one-note character on script. I think it was smart of Diablo Cody to make the popular girl not be a bitch to someone perceived to be on a lower level on the social chain, instead making Taffy a supportive and funny character you like just as much as Lisa. I think we’ll be seeing Soberano in more films in the future. As for Carla Cugino, she doesn’t really get enough time to really shine like one would expect. But she makes the most of her screen time, hamming it up and reciting some of the quirkiest dialogue I’ve heard in a long time. I could tell Cugino was enjoying the hell out of this role, making me wish she had more to do and had more interactions with Newton, who plays off of her really well as a foil. THE FINAL HOWLLISA FRANKENSTEIN is an amusing and fun horror rom-com that tries a bit too hard to be a future cult film in the making, sort of in the vein of HEATHERS or even JENNIFER’S BODY. Diablo Cody’s quirky and memorable dialogue elevates a story that slowly loses its way by the time the film hits its third act, thanks to an energetic cast who bring colorful characters to life. The uneven tone doesn’t help, as this movie is more of a zombie rom-com than an actual horror film - not completely succeeding at either one. In her film directorial debut, Zelda Williams shows promise for future projects with some cool visuals at times and a great use of lighting. The cast is what keeps LISA FRANKENSTEIN worth watching, with Kathryn Newton doing her best work as a shy high schooler who transforms into a goth princess once a wish she makes comes true. Her chemistry with Cole Sprouse, who does well with mainly a solid physical performance due to lack of dialogue, is great. Solid supporting performances by a bubbly Liza Soberano and a sassy Carla Cugino add substance to the quirky atmosphere. LISA FRANKENSTEIN didn’t bring me to life or anything, but it’s worth an eventual look if you’re in the mood for a horror rom-com buried in nostalgia.SCORE2.5 Howls Outta 4(6 out of 10)

Night Swim (2024)
DIRECTED BYBryce McGuireSTARRINGWyatt Russell - Ray WallerKerry Condon - Eve WallerAmelie Hoefele - Izzy WallerGavin Warren - Elliot WallerJodi Long - Lucy SummersNancy Lenehan - KayGenre - Horror/SupernaturalRunning Time - 98 MinutesPLOTForced into early retirement by a degenerative illness, former baseball player Ray Waller moves into a new house with his wife and two children. He hopes that the backyard swimming pool will be fun for the kids and provide physical therapy for himself. However, a dark secret from the home’s past soon unleashes a malevolent force that drags the family into the depths of inescapable terror.REVIEWThe last couple of years started off pretty strong, with 2022’s SCREAM and 2023’s M3GAN pretty much setting the horror genre on a good pace for the rest of those respective years. While the trailers for Blumhouse’s NIGHT SWIM didn’t exactly excite me in any sort of way, I was hoping for a decent enough time that would give me some hope for some killer horror movies for 2024.It took me a while to pin down my thoughts for NIGHT SWIM because I honestly don’t have anything to really discuss about this bland film that left me more underwhelmed than I was expecting it to. Going in, I was expecting something similar to 1977’s DEATH BED: THE BED THAT EATS. The only difference is that it would be a swimming pool eating and/or killing people in a fun B-movie way. I wasn’t expecting a lamer version of THE AMITYVILLE HORROR with less murder, unearned insanity and a resolution that had people in my theater laughing their heads off. To get the good stuff out of the way, I thought the film looked nice with some cool shots here and there. The actors were giving more than what the screenplay deserved honestly, Wyatt Russell and Kerry Condon, in particular, deserve better material but are sympathetic as parents who are struggling for different reasons. The two younger actors (Amelie Hoefele and Gavin Warren) are likable as well. And I think the concept of a supernatural pool that grants one’s desires while demanding a violent sacrifice is super interesting.However, the execution is weak and it creates a pretty dull film that contains elements of other horror movies that have executed these elements way better. There’s an investigation of this supernatural pool that doesn’t explore things enough, considering all the sacrifices that inhabit the pool. I guess you need a reason for a prequel or sequels since everything has to be a franchise/universe. The father of the family gets possessed like in THE AMITYVILLE HORROR, but it happens way too late into the film and not much is done with it until the very end. The change is all surface level and we don’t really get much depth, which NIGHT SWIM seriously lacks. And the worst part? It’s not scary or suspenseful at all. In fact, I chuckled when I saw the first CGI figure that appears in the pool to scare one of the characters. I doubt that’s the reaction the filmmakers wanted.THE FINAL HOWLNIGHT SWIM has a great idea that could have been explored in many interesting ways, but just decides to play it safe and give audiences something they’ve already seen countless of times. I’m sure it worked as a short film and this could have been pretty cool as a miniseries on Peacock to flesh out characters and ideas. But it seriously fell flat for me and I will probably never watch this again. Not worth dipping your feet into, in my opinion.SCORE1.5 Howls Outta 4(4 out of 10)

Lunar Cycle - December 2023
Since I don’t have as much time to write longer reviews than I used to, I figured I would just post shorter reviews for horror/cult films that I feel deserve your attention.Directed By: Takashi YamazakiStarring: Ryunosuke Kamiki, Hidetaka Yoshioka, Minami Hamabe, Kuranosuke Sasaki, Yuki Yamada, Saki Nakatani Genre: Horror/Drama/Science Fiction/ActionRunning Time: 125 MinutesScore: 4 Howls Outta 4 (10 out of 10)PLOT: In postwar Japan, a new terror rises. Will the devastated people be able to survive… let alone fight back?REVIEW:GODZILLA MINUS ONE may be the surprise film of 2023 for me. I had never planned to watch this new installment of Toho’s iconic monster in theaters, but friends kept mentioning it and decided to watch it on opening night on a whim. While I expected awesome monster action and cities getting destroyed by a giant lizard, I didn’t expect an actual human story that not only is emotional, but made me forget that I was watching a GODZILLA movie at times.The entire cast, especially Ryunosuke Kamiki as former kamikaze pilot Koichi, is incredible in MINUS ONE. Kamiki, in particular, juggles a lot of emotional beats as a soldier who struggles with deserting his country at the end of World War II. Things get worse when Godzilla shows up and murders a bunch of mechanics on an island Koichi lands on, guilt building when he had a chance to save them all but is too scared to confront the monster face-to-face. We watch Kamiki play Koichi as a man struggling with PTSD - distancing himself from a woman he meets [who also has a child she’s taking care of due to the death of the child’s parents during the war] and feeling like a ghost in a devastated post-war Japan. When Godzilla shows back up and sees the damage the creature causes in front of him multiple times, he knows he has to confront his literal monster even if he has to off himself to do it.The story is so well-written, well-paced and gives so many character arcs to multiple characters that we actually care about their encounters with Godzilla, hoping they find a way to stop the monster. Godzilla, playing a role closer to his original incarnation from 1954, is a complete villain here, destroying everything in its path and coming across as entirely unstoppable. This is a Godzilla who doesn’t care who or what it is destroying, as long as he gets to unleash its devastation as many times as possible.Director Takashi Yamazaki takes a $15 million budget and makes MINUS ONE look better than most Hollywood blockbusters have looked in the last few years. And these films have budgets that are ten to fifteen times as much as MINUS ONE. Yamazaki lets the human story simmer and plays it all seriously, letting things build up towards the film’s exciting final act while twists and turns happen when you least expect it. The action sequences are thrilling and look phenomenal for the film’s budget. Godzilla, in particular, looks awesome - especially when he’s building up that atomic heat ray that destroys whatever is in its path. The pacing is so damn good and I loved the homage to JAWS anytime Godzilla swam underneath ships that were searching for it. The use of the original GODZILLA theme also made me giddy and was used at appropriate times. I hear Yamazaki wants to direct a STAR WARS film and I would be down to see what he does with that property with a much larger budget.Seriously, GODZILLA MINUS ONE is not only one of the best installments in this multi-decade franchise, but it may just be the best installment of them all. It clicks in every way and checks every box that I would ever want in a GODZILLA film. I’m super happy word-of-mouth on social media has helped the film continue its success in America because this movie deserves it. One of the best films of 2023.Directed By: Rhys Frake-Waterfield Starring: Craig David Dowsett, Chris Cordell, Amber Doig-Thorne, Nikolai Leon, Maria Taylor, Natasha Rose Mills, Danielle RonaldGenre: Horror/Slasher Running Time: 84 MinutesScore: 0.5 Howls Outta 4 (2 out of 10)PLOT: Christopher Robin is headed off to college and he has abandoned his old friends, Pooh and Piglet, which then leads to the duo embracing their inner monsters. REVIEW:So apparently while Disney owns the rights to the Winnie the Pooh characters when it comes to their own franchise within the studio, the original Winnie-the-Pooh book from 1926 had its rights go to public domain for the first time in decades. This allowed filmmaker Rhys Frake-Waterfield the opportunity to write, direct, produce and edit a slasher film called WINNIE-THE-POOH: BLOOD & HONEY, starring these classic characters to the surprise and anger of many. And I totally understand the fan reaction to this because I’m surprised I watched this in one entire sitting and I’m angry I wasted 80 minutes of my life giving this a shot.I mean, the concept for this movie is actually quite good. Christopher Robin befriends the Winnie-the-Pooh characters throughout his young life, leading to the characters to be emotionally attached to their human friend. But once he grows old enough for college and decides to leave them for a higher education and pursue his adult life without them, the characters grow bitter and resentful enough to want revenge on Robin and other humans who enter 100 Acre Woods. That sounds like a cool horror movie!Too bad this only works for the first ten minutes of the movie, leaving 74 minutes of Pooh and Piglet stalking bland and annoying female characters who do the most dumb things I’ve seen characters do in a horror film in a very long time. It almost borders on misogynistic, as Pooh and Piglet have no issues targeting young women for slaughter but aren’t as brutal on the male characters that show up. It doesn’t help that these female characters are way too ignorant or lack any common sense for any audience to care about them in any sort of meaningful way other than to watch classic characters eliminate them. I mean, sure you can talk to hostages for five straight minutes in Pooh’s lair. It would be smarter to free them and have them explain things once you’re safe enough from danger, but what do I know right? Other than a cool idea, an amusing pre-credits sequence and decent gore sequences, WINNIE-THE-POOH: BLOOD & HONEY has nothing else to offer. The direction isn’t all that impressive. The acting is not good. The costumes look alright I guess, but doesn’t save the film from being terrible. I’m sure some will laugh at how stupid and bad this film is [especially if you’re under the influence of certain substances]. But I think most will just be frustrated by the end of this film, wishing death on everyone on screen. This honestly may be the worst film I’ve watched that was released in 2023. I’m actually sad this is getting a sequel because that means I’ll probably have to watch it for a review. And I thought Eeyore had a depressing life. Directed By: Tyler MacIntyre Starring: Jane Widdop, Joel McHale, Justin Long, Jess McLeod, Katharine Isabelle Genre: Horror/Thriller/Comedy/Slasher Running Time: 87 Minutes Score: 2 Howls Outta 4 (5 out of 10) PLOT: Winnie’s life is less than wonderful one year after saving her town from a psychotic killer on Christmas Eve. When she wishes she was never born, she finds herself magically transported to a nightmarish parallel universe. With the murderous maniac now back, she must team up with a misfit to identify the culprit and get back to her own reality. REVIEW:A horror take on the 1946 Frank Capra holiday classic IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE [with some elements of 1983’s A CHRISTMAS STORY implemented], I was expecting a scary version of a familiar story. Considering it was written by a co-writer of 2020’s FREAKY and riding the wave of time-traveling horror films like 2017’s HAPPY DEATH DAY and 2023’s TOTALLY KILLER, it should have been mostly a slam dunk. Unfortunately, IT’S A WONDERFUL KNIFE is just a mediocre slasher film that has a really cool concept but doesn’t bother to execute it to its fullest potential. The first act is the best part of this film, as it gets into the plot right away and reveals things that will be important once the time changes for the rest of the film. And while seeing a different timeline is cool at times in IT’S A WONDERFUL KNIFE, not enough time is given to really flesh out the major changes that the Final Girl Winnie has to deal with in order to get her back to her original timeline. While relationships are different and the mystery of the killer gets a bit more complex, things just happen because they need to in order for the story to move forward towards its conclusion. There’s no real tension, suspense or drama that’s brought out from these changes, making one wonder why even bother using this concept to begin with. The final act also feels way too convenient and easy for the main characters to achieve that Hollywood ending, which is a shame. While some shots are cool looking, mainly due to lighting and framing, Tyler MacIntyre and his team didn’t really wow me with their visual presentation. It does what it needs to do to get from Point A to Point B. The actors are probably the highlight here, especially Justin Long as this greedy narcissistic Mayor and Joel McHale playing a serious role that actually works for the most part. It’s also nice to see Katharine Isabelle doing her thing, while Jane Widdop does what she can with the material. I would like to see her in a better project. I really wanted this to be an annual holiday tradition, but I honestly can’t see myself willingly watching this again unless it was to show friends or for a podcast for whatever reason. While it’s definitely better to just stick with IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE, there’s nothing wrong with more holiday horror. So if you’re curious, check it out. I just hope you don’t wish that you were watching a better film like I did.Directed By: Jenn WexlerStarring: Georgia Acken, Mena Massoud, Olivia Scott Welch, Gus Kenworthy, Chloe Levine, Derek Johns, Laurent Pitre, Madison Baines Genre: Horror/Thriller/Supernatural/DemonsRunning Time: 99 MinutesScore: 3 Howls Outta 4 (7 out of 10)PLOT: Christmas break, 1971. Samantha and Clara, two students who are staying behind for the holidays at their boarding school, must survive the night after the arrival of uninvited visitors.REVIEW:Did any of you watch this year’s THE HOLDOVERS and wish it had a more horror slant involving a group of serial killers murdering people in order to summon a demon during the holidays? Well if you did, THE SACRIFICE GAME is definitely your jam. I didn’t know what to expect out of this, even though the trailer was intriguing. But a lot of this film worked for me, both visually and narratively. Jenn Wexler was smart in using a 70s vibe, a time where Satanic Panic was at its peak. It added an old school horror feel to THE SACRIFICE GAME that added a bit of atmosphere to film that mainly takes place indoors the entire time. I also thought the horror elements were used sparingly well, with the special effects looking very good. The final act isn’t shy about showing blood and gore, which was a nice change of pace from the more quiet and talky first two acts. The story is also pretty simple, as a group of people are going from home to home killing people to collect blood in order to summon a demon that’s trapped inside of a boarding school. It plays straightforward for the first half of the film, until the twists begin that make the movie a lot of fun to watch. It’s tough to discuss the last half without spoiling stuff, but I like how misunderstandings and not doing enough research can get some really stupid and greedy people in trouble.The acting is hit-and-miss, with some actors really hamming it up with some interesting line readings that amused me more than get me invested in their character arcs. Mena Massoud, the live-action star of 2019’s ALADDIN, really twirls that proverbial mustache as the film’s lead villain, chewing up scenery any chance he gets. It works in some instances and it’s really distracting during others. But at least Massoud is having fun. I thought the two younger actresses, Georgia Acken and Madison Baines, were very good - especially Acken since she’s given more to do. Gus Kenworthy doesn’t get a whole lot to do, but he’s a recognizable name that will interest some viewers. While the holidays are over, I still recommend this one if you have Shudder. I think it has enough interesting twists and good enough acting to earn a recommendation for anyone looking for a recent Christmas horror flick.

Thanksgiving (2023)
DIRECTED BYEli RothSTARRINGPatrick Dempsey - Sheriff Eric NewtonNell Verlaque - Jessica WrightAddison Rae - GabbyJalen Thomas Brooks - BobbyMilo Manheim - RyanRick Hoffman - Thomas WrightGina Gershon - Amanda CollinsTomaso Sanelli - EvanGabriel Davenport - ScubaJenna Warren - YuliaKaren Cliche - KathleenTy Olsson - Mitch CollinsGenre - Horror/SlasherRunning Time - 106 MinutesPLOTAn axe-wielding maniac terrorizes residents of Plymouth, Mass., after a Black Friday riot ends in tragedy. Picking off victims one by one, the seemingly random revenge killings soon become part of a larger, sinister plan.REVIEWBack in 2007, Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino released a double-feature called GRINDHOUSE - an unfortunate box-office miss but a huge cult classic that showcased Rodriguez’s PLANET TERROR and Tarantino’s DEATH PROOF, as well as fake trailers that ended up being discussion points all their own. Probably the most popular trailer was for Eli Roth’s THANKSGIVING, a homage to old school slashers focused around popular holidays. It gained enough buzz that Roth teased it would become an actual film.For a while, hope for a THANKSGIVING movie lost traction as Eli Roth was more focused on other projects either as a director, actor or producer. But soon enough, Roth confirmed it was happening and we started getting photos and footage of the production. So after 16 years, THANKSGIVING was finally released in time for the actual holiday. But was it worth the wait or a total disappointment?I can happily say that not only is THANKSGIVING worth the wait and a very cool slasher movie, but it’s also one of Eli Roth’s best films - at least his best one since probably CABIN FEVER. THANKSGIVING is a slasher that knows what it is, playing as a old-school whodunit slasher rather than your modern self-aware slasher film like SCREAM. And honestly, that’s actually refreshing in this modern horror scene. I was happy to see archetypal characters hitting those expected tropes, with a nice bit of depth to each of them as well. Add in a mystery to our Killer Pilgrim and we got ourselves a fun, little slasher flick here.I appreciated the simplicity of the story, as it’s your typical revenge slasher film where the mysterious killer is targeting the protagonists due to being part of a sin, or crime, that the killer feels must be dealt with. In THANKSGIVING, the first ten or fifteen minutes involves a Black Friday event gone really wrong, as frustrated customers rush into a store for a free waffle iron while pushing, attacking, trampling and killing random people inside the store. One of the victims is a close friend of the killer, causing them to want vengeance on a bunch of teenagers who snuck into the store [the Final Girl’s dad owns the establishment].Unfortunately, I figured out the killer’s identity right when the inciting incident happened. But the film does play it smart in making a few of the characters red herrings. The Final Girl Jessica has two love interests - one who was injured during the Black Friday incident and disappeared for a while before returning, and another who has money and looks down at some of her friends - both who have motive. The former manager of the store makes it known he wants to take the corporation down, especially since his wife was murdered during Black Friday. We have the owner of the store [Jessica’s dad] and his greedy new wife. We have the Sheriff of the town who was there. We also have an A-hole jock and his more heroic A-hole jock friend. There’s also a new Deputy who doesn’t mind wearing the Pilgrim mask from time to time. The characters have enough depth beyond their archetypes to give each one of them reason to want revenge on what happened. And the film plays out like an old school slasher should. We have characters acting stupid and doing dumb things that get them into trouble. We have characters who seem villainous who are actually misunderstood. We have characters who seem heroic but are just hiding secrets that relate to the Black Friday fiasco. There are side characters who are just there to increase the body count. And there are some great murder sequences - including someone getting baked inside a giant oven, impaled through the head, sliced in half by a dumpster and even fire. Some of the kills from the original 2007 trailer do make it in, like the Thanksgiving Parade decapitation. The trampoline scene is here, but it’s done differently and not as impactful. And no human turkeys get sexually assaulted, as times have changed since 2007. I do wish the double decapitation bit from the trailer was included though, as that was some of the funniest stuff in the trailer. But this version of THANKSGIVING plays things more seriously, so I can understand why it’s not included.To say that THANKSGIVING is Eli Roth’s best looking and most polished film is an understatement. There’s a confidence here, as Roth probably had this film playing in his head for almost two decades, knowing exactly what shots he was gonna do and how he was going to visually play the story out. The gore looks great. The flow is pretty much exceptional. There’s actual tension and suspense. And when humor is used, it’s actually pretty funny. Roth also uses locations well, making them characters of their own. And as you watch, it’s obvious he was inspired by other slasher films. The opening is a take on the opening scene of the original HALLOWEEN. The Thanksgiving Parade is straight out of 1997’s I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER. There’s a Thanksgiving dinner scene that’s obviously a homage to 1981’s HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ME. And we have a love angle that seems to be inspired by 1981’s MY BLOODY VALENTINE. Just really cool how Roth incorporated all of this to make a fun throwback slasher.The cast is good as well. Nell Verlaque is solid as Jessica, the Final Girl who is smart and aware of bad things when they happen. Verlaque is sympathetic and likable. Patrick Dempsey returns to horror as Sheriff Newton, portraying a convincing authority figure who sometimes seems over his head when it comes to the slashings. Jalen Thomas Brooks is good as Bobby, Jessica’s returning ex-boyfriend. While he comes across as reliable and likable, some of Brooks’ actions for his character make you question his true motives. Same goes to Milo Manheim as Ryan, Jessica’s current boyfriend who seems to have a chip on his shoulder, making you wonder what his deal is. Addison Rae, Gabriel Davenport and especially Tomaso Sanelli are good as Jessica’s friends - especially Saneilli, who plays a jock who you wouldn’t mind getting picked off for how he behaves and treats other people. And it’s always cool to see character actors like Rick Hoffman and Gina Gershon in supporting roles.THE FINAL HOWLTHANKSGIVING is worth the 16-year wait, as it plays by the old school slasher rules and has a good time doing so. With a solid cast and your typical whodunit slasher mystery, the movie ends up being a fun ride due to archetypes that have a bit more depth than expected, wild gore sequences and a strong use of locations and set pieces that build a lot more tension and atmosphere than I was expecting. It’s also nice to see an engaged Eli Roth direct one of his best movies in his filmography, playing homage to many familiar slasher movies while putting his own twist on each one. The film looks good, the pacing is solid and the humor actually works in the movie’s favor. Plus, this John Carver villain has a great look and could be a cult icon if the film becomes more successful to create a franchise out of. THANKSGIVING doesn’t reinvent the slasher wheel and the villain’s identity is pretty easy to figure out, which took away the mystery aspect for me. But overall, I had a lot of fun with a movie I’ve been waiting a long time for and it didn't disappoint for the most part. THANKSGIVING will probably be an annual movie tradition for me every end of November.SCORE3 Howls Outta 4(8 out of 10)

Howls of the Week (10/29/23 - 11/04/23)
This will probably be a new feature, similar to the old monthly LUNAR CYCLE I used to do. I figured I would just post quick thoughts on films I've recently seen, while giving bigger/solo spotlights to more popular/important films. Let's see how this goes.BLOOD FOR DRACULA (1974)Directed By: Paul MorrisseyStarring: Udo Kier, Joe Dallesandro, Vittorio de Sica, Maxine McKendryGenre: Horror/VampiresRunning Time: 103 MinutesScore: 3 Howls Outta 4 (8 out of 10)Plot: Deathly ill Count Dracula and his slimy underling, Anton, travel to Italy in search of a virgin’s blood. They’re welcomed at the crumbling estate of indebted Marchese Di Fiore, who’s desperate to marry off his daughters to rich suitors. But there, instead of pure women, the count encounters incestuous lesbians with vile blood and Marxist manservant Mario, who’s suspicious of the aristocratic Dracula.Review:Presented by Andy Warhol after the cult success of FLESH FOR FRANKENSTEIN, BLOOD FOR DRACULA is director’s Paul Morrissey’s superior follow up that focuses on Dracula and her servant traveling to Italy searching for virgin blood, as Dracula is severely ill from a lack of pure sustenance. While the acting is not great and the story isn’t the strongest, BLOOD FOR DRACULA is very worthwhile for a few reasons.One, Morrissey’s direction is very good, as he uses many camera techniques and shot-scales to enhance the narrative. The cinematography is also well done, as this film is quite beautiful to look at.Two, the subtext in this film is very strong and shows that a Dracula in a modern world probably wouldn’t survive for too long. There’s commentary on politics, class status [a rich Count is feeding on the poor to make himself richer] and the deterioration of religion when it comes to sex. The fact that this Dracula turns literal green after feeding on non-virgin blood twice within a supposed religious household says it all.And three, this has to be one of the sleaziest DRACULA films ever put to screen. Incestuous siblings, a servant who forces himself on women [who ends up being the hero strangely] and disgusting acts like Dracula crawling on the floor to lick up virgin blood after a girl has been sexually assaulted to save her life from the Count. Not to mention, the epic finale that will probably make you lose a few limbs like you’re a Black Knight in a Monty Python sketch.This is a DRACULA story that needs to be watched if you enjoy a memorable vampire flick.VAMPYRES (1974)Directed By: José Ramón LarrazStarring: Marianne Morris, Anulka Dziubinska, Murray Brown, Brian Deacon, Sally FaulknerGenre: Horror/VampiresRunning Time: 88 MinutesScore: 2.5 Howls Outta 4 (6 out of 10)Plot: A duo of bisexual female vampires prey on passing motorists, whom they seduce and murder in the English countryside. Review: A story of bisexual vampires luring people at night to satiate their bloodlust, Jose Ramon Larraz’s VAMPYRES is a visually stunning film that unfortunately doesn’t have much of a story to really invest in. This film is a sleazy slow burn, with the two lead actresses seducing characters and the audiences with their good looks and sexual chemistry with each other. Cinemax would be proud of the sex scenes displayed in this movie. The use of the film’s main setting, a mansion in the countryside, is well done. The forest outside of this mansion almost seems like a character in itself, as these beautiful vampires just lurk around waiting for victims. It’s just too bad there’s not much of a story besides the brutal opening scene and a love triangle of sorts between the two vampires and a male victim one of them is in love with. VAMPYRES is not a scary film, more focused on titillating the audience. But watching the male lead kiss one of the actresses multiple times was pretty nightmare inducing. Open mouth, flailing tongue and just nasty love making all around. Even beautiful vampires can have a lack of taste, I guess.FASCINATION (1979)Directed By: Jean RollinStarring: Franca Mai, Jean-Marie Lamaire, Brigitte Lahaie, Fanny MagierGenre: Horror/VampiresRunning Time: 80 MinutesScore: 3 Howls Outta 4 (8 out of 10)Plot: A runaway criminal breaks into an eerie chateau, taking its two frightened chambermaids hostage. As night falls, a group of mysterious aristocratic women arrive and the criminal begins to realize the women are hiding a sinister secret.Review: My first Jean Rollin film ever, believe it or not, the French-language FASCINATION is a vampire movie that surprised me with how well shot and how well told it was. The plot is super simple, with a thief hiding inside a chateau with two beautiful servants who obviously aren’t as they seem. The film is romantic, melodramatic and has very memorable moments throughout. I think the iconic scene is the scythe sequence, which is full of tension and suspense. It’s also quite stunning to look at. For an 80 minute film, it sets up a lot for the first two acts before crashing into a sinister and bloody final act that feels mostly ironic to what we knew of these characters and their situations before. It’s also interesting how they tried to make the thief into an anti-hero of sorts by the end, even though it doesn’t really feel earned. But love will make you do some strange things, whether it’s returned or not. FASCINATION proves that there’s beauty in horror.THE HUNGER (1983)Directed By: Tony Scott Starring: Catherine Deneuve, David Bowie, Susan Sarandon, Cliff DeYoung, Beth Ehlers, Dan HeyadaGenre: Horror/Drama/VampiresRunning Time: 97 MinutesScore: 3 Howls Outta 4 (8 out of 10)Plot: Miriam promises her lovers the gift of eternal life, but John, her companion for centuries, suddenly discovers that he is getting old minute by minute, so he looks for Dr. Sarah Roberts, a researcher on the mechanisms of aging, and asks her for help.Review: The late Tony Scott’s directorial debut, this cult classic adapted from a novel didn’t get a lot of love 40 years ago. And while it’s definitely imperfect, it shows Scott’s style that would only improve in his future works like TOP GUN and TRUE ROMANCE. It’s visually sleek, looking atmospheric and moody like those early MTV music videos, with quick editing and juxtapositions to make certain moments pop. While the story could be stronger, I do appreciate the themes addressed in the film. Having the man deal with the effects of aging instead of a woman is an interesting touch, especially when this struggle also seems to be a commentary on the AIDS epidemic that had only just become known two years prior. The performances are very good with Catherine Deneuve being a strong presence as Miriam, who gives her lovers the promise of an eternal life but had all of them age on her quickly for some reason. David Bowie is captivating as Deneuve’s husband, John, getting to play with aging makeup and a pretty messed-up murder sequence. And Susan Sarandon is stunning as the doctor who is studying these aging effects, but gets caught up in Miriam’s web to bad results. Any film that starts out with a Bauhaus performance definitely deserves one’s attention.

Howls of the Week (10/22/23 - 10/28/23)
This will probably be a new feature, similar to the old monthly LUNAR CYCLE I used to do. I figured I would just post quick thoughts on films I've recently seen, while giving bigger/solo spotlights to more popular/important films. Let's see how this goes.SANTO AND BLUE DEMON VS. DRACULA AND THE WOLFMAN (1973)Directed By: Miguel M. DelgadoStarring: Santo, Blue Demon, Aldo Monti, Agustin Martinez Solares, Nubia Marti, Maria Eugenia San Martin, Alfredo Wally Barron, Jorge MondragonGenre: Horror/Action/Adventure/Vampires/Werewolves Running Time: 90 MinutesScore: 2.5 Howls Outta 4 (6 out of 10)Plot: After facing defeat at the hands of Cristaldi the magician, Dracula is back to seek revenge and rule the world. With the help of Wolfman and his legion of followers, victory seems eminent. Professor Cristaldi, a descendant of the magician, is warned about Dracula’s plans and calls upon El Santo and Blue Demon in the hopes that they can put the infamous Count and the werewolf down for good.Review: Another installment starring the two most famous Lucha Libre wrestlers of their era, SANTO & BLUE DEMON VS. DRACULA & THE WOLFMAN involves a scientist who brings back Dracula and the Wolfman to the living world after being manipulated by a scheming hunchback. Apparently the scientist’s ancestors took care of Dracula centuries before, making him plot revenge on him and his female relatives - one who is dating Santo.It’s not as good as SANTO & BLUE DEMON VS. THE MONSTERS, but it’s still a fun time overall. Evil Dracula [played by a returning Aldo Monti] bites some people, hypnotizes other people and even tries to get his revenge on a clueless child who has some of the worst English dubbing ever. The werewolf, beautifully named Rufus Rex, uses his human good looks and “heroics” to manipulate the scientist’s daughter. You get your standard wrestling matches [which are done on a soundstage with no visible crowd for some reason], Santo and Blue Demon fighting off vampires and a group of hairy werewolves over a pit and other silliness to pass the runtime. The film was obviously inspired by the Hammer and/or Paul Naschy films of the era, making this film super colorful and visually polished [this film definitely had a budget]. I think fans of Santo, Blue Demon, or both will get a kick out of this one.CHANOC AND THE SON OF SANTO VS. THE KILLER VAMPIRES (1983)Directed By: Rafael Perez GrovasStarring: Santo, El Hijo del Santo, Nelson Velazquez, Arturo Cobo, Rubi Re, Marcos VargasGenre: Horror/Comedy/Action/VampiresRunning Time: 85 MinutesScore: 0.5 Howls Outta 4 (2 out of 10)Plot: Chanoc fights alongside Santo’s son against the Killer Vampires.Review: Before his retirement a year later, Santo appears one last time in his wrestling persona on film as he passes the torch to his real life son in the opening moments of this movie. You’d think with a younger version of Santo, the action and story would be more exciting and modern for a new generation of people. But in one of the worst films I’ve seen all year, CHANOC & THE SON OF SANTO VS. THE KILLER VAMPIRES is a waste of everyone’s time. That includes the people who were part of this production and for anyone who spent 85 minutes suffering through this thing. If it wasn’t for the fact that this film looks alright and there are some decent musical sequences (!), this would be a total dud. Not only is it dull for the most part, but we’re stuck with two actors playing these annoying old men who are trying to pass as comic relief. I thought this was a Son of Santo film, but he feels like a supporting character in his own movie. The wrestling scenes feel like a parody of what they once were. The action is repetitive. Random scenes pop up to fill up time because there isn’t much of a story here. And those killer vampires? You maybe get five minutes worth with them and they don’t seem to be real vampires anyway. They’re just a gang dressed as them to scare people. It’s really depressing to see how low this series has fallen. I pretty much hated this movie and would never ever watch this again.FIVE NIGHTS AT FREDDY'S (2023)Directed By: Emma TammiStarring: Josh Hutcherson, Piper Rubio, Elizabeth Lail, Matthew Lillard, Mary Stuart MastersonGenre: Horror/Mystery/Supernatural/Ghosts/RobotsRunning Time: 110 MinutesScore: 1.5 Howls (4 out of 10)Plot: Recently fired and desperate for work, a troubled young man named Mike agrees to take a position as a night security guard at an abandoned theme restaurant: Freddy Fazbear’s Pizzeria. But he soon discovers that nothing at Freddy’s is what it seems.Review: Based on the popular video game, Universal and Blumhouse apparently hit the box-office jackpot with their adaptation that may have brought Josh Hutcherson back to the A-list. If I were a fan of the games or even younger, I probably would have enjoyed this. But it honestly didn’t do much for me overall. I do love the Jim Henson animatronics, cool practical effects and a well-acted cast who are totally game to bring these ideas to life. But I didn’t find the film scary and some of the screenwriting and twists are odd and predictable. Like characters just buy everything that’s going on in the film without an ounce of skepticism, which didn’t allow enough drama to play out. And there’s so much story in this film that it becomes a bit long-in-the-tooth after a while. I’m glad people watched this in theaters and on Peacock for a successful Halloween weekend. But I’d probably just watch WILLY’S WONDERLAND, since that seems to be more of my vibe.NO ONE WILL SAVE YOU (2023)Directed By: Brian DuffieldStarring: Kaitlyn Dever, Elizabeth Kaluev, Zack Duhame, Lauren L. MurrayGenre: Thriller/Horror/Science Fiction/AliensRunning Time: 97 MinutesScore: 3 Howls Outta 4 (7 out of 10)Plot: A young woman who’s been alienated from her community finds herself in a face-off against a host of extraterrestrial beings who threaten her future while forcing her to deal with her past.Review: I finally caught up with this Hulu exclusive after all the hype it received last month. While I didn’t think it was the greatest film ever, I did enjoy it for the most part. An alien invasion movie is nothing new and this film doesn’t really reinvent the wheel, instead just turning this into a home invasion/INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS redo. But I liked how the film worked well without much dialogue [I believe only five lines are said throughout this movie]. The lack of dialogue is greatly helped by a wonderful performance by BOOKSMART actress Kaitlyn Dever, whose body language and facial expressions tell you everything you need to know. She carried this movie on her back like a champ. Her character arc was also very interesting, especially how her neighborhood hated her for whatever reason, leading to a reveal in the final act that I wasn’t expecting. I also thought the ending could be interpreted in multiple ways depending on who you are, which I think may have divided many people if social media is any indication. But the CGI aliens are interesting looking enough, but nothing that you’ll remember a month from now. And the film is pretty much just one tough woman defending herself against aliens and her own town, which slowly becomes overrun by pod people. I’m not sure if I would watch this again, unless it was for a podcast or something. But I do recommend it if you’re looking for a science fiction film done mostly right.OUT THERE HALLOWEEN MEGA TAPE (2022)Directed By: Chris LaMartinaStarring: Melissa LaMartina, Ted GeogheganGenre: Horror/ComedyRunning Time: 91 MinutesScore: 3 Howls Outta 4 (8 out of 10)Plot: Gorge yourself on candy corn and hunker down for a haunted house party filled with aliens, vamps, and phantom tramps via this hard-to-find flick from an infamous East Coast ’90’s bootleg video operation. Straight from the archives of Trader Tony’s Tape Dungeon, the “Out There Halloween Mega Tape” was assembled from the highest quality source materials available and presented just as it was sold via Trader Tony’s mail order catalog in the 1990’s.Review: The sequel to the 2013 cult hit WNUF HALLOWEEN SPECIAL, this sequel is actually a lot of fun and gets all the 90s pop culture references and advertisements fairly perfectly. More comedy than its predecessor, OUT THERE HALLOWEEN MEGA TAPE is mainly focused on daytime talk show host Ivy Sparks.The first half of the feature revolves around her talk show, where she has several guests - including a wife who is cheating on her husband with a female ghost and a vampire who is forced by a family member into one of those makeovers. The vibe of the show is definitely Ricki Lake, mixed with some Maury and Jerry Springer as well. The second half is a parody of that FOX paranormal show from the 90s, Sightings, which focuses on an impending alien invasion and a Heaven’s Gate like cult who believe the aliens are coming to take them to their home planet since Earth is wasting away due to climate change and pollution. It makes fun of Heaven’s Gate and their beliefs, while poking light at how the government is hiding the truth about extraterrestrials by disrupting their television special. Ivy Sparks, having been fired from her talk show, is now "Out There’s" co-host and pretty much does her schtick to a bunch of annoyed brainwashed cult members.The real gem with this sequel is obviously the commercials throughout the mega tape, which capture those memorable ads you watched on television during the 1990s. All of them are really funny and I was impressed with the research and time put into each and every one of them. Definitely recommended.SORORITY SLAUGHTER (1994)Directed By: Gary WhitsonStarring: Tina Krause, Dave Castiglione, Debbie D, Deana Enoches, Laura GiglioGenre: Horror/SlasherRunning Time: 87 MinutesScore: 0.5 Howls Outta 4 (2 out of 10)Plot: Three sorority girls play a prank on their creepy neighbor, Hugo. He is accidentally shot and killed, but returns to life in order to kill them as human sacrifices in order to grant himself immortality.Review: The only thing that’ll be slaughtered is your time, as SORORITY SLAUGHTER is the longest 87 minutes of your life. Shot on video, this film contains some of the longest scenes of nothing you’ll ever see. Ever wanted to experience a strangle sequence that lasts about 10 minutes? Have you ever wanted to watch characters wash a car for 15 minutes? You ever wished you could have human sacrifices mixed with random T-shirt contests? What about sex scenes where none of the actors seem into it at all? Then this film is for you! Hell, was there even a sorority in this movie?? There’s even an extended cut and a sequel to this! I usually like Tina Krause but this film is just pure torture. Probably the worst thing I’ve seen all week.

Howls of the Week (10/15/23 - 10/21/23)
This will probably be a new feature, similar to the old monthly LUNAR CYCLE I used to do. I figured I would just post quick thoughts on films I've recently seen, while giving bigger/solo spotlights to more popular/important films. Let's see how this goes.BARON BRAKULA (1967)Directed By: José Díaz MoralesStarring: Santo, Fernando Oses, Mercedes Carreno, Antonio de Hud, Susana RoblesGenre: Horror/Action/VampiresRunning Time: 77 MinutesScore: 2 Howls Outta 4 (6 out of 10)Plot: Santo goes up against the vampire Baron Brakola, who has returned to seek vengeance on the descendants of the Knight in the Silver Mask (Santo’s colonial era ancestor).Review: Santo sure loves fighting vampires, as BARON BRAKOLA is another installment of our favorite Lucha Libre star battling the undead. I actually liked this a bit more than SANTO VS. THE VAMPIRE WOMEN, only because there seemed to be higher production values and an interesting narrative that went back-and-forth between the past and present. I enjoyed the swashbuckling aspect of the past scenes with The Knight In the Silver Mask getting one up on Brakola, causing the vampire to go after Santo [Silver Mask’s descendant] and the female descendant of a past enemy in the present day, which have more action/wrestling scenes of its time. The cheap effects, including a frame cut disappearing act and a rubber bat scratching windows, add a nice charm as well. Brakola is really goofy looking as well, which brings some unintentional comedy. Nothing groundbreaking or a must-see, but Santo fans will eat this up for the film’s short and breezy runtime.DAUGHTERS OF DARKNESS (1971)Directed By: Harry KümelStarring: Delphine Seyrig, John Karlen, Danielle Quimet, Andrea RauGenre: Horror/Thriller/Drama/VampiresRunning Time: 100 MinutesScore: 3 Howls Outta 4 (8 out of 10)Plot: A newlywed couple are passing through a vacation resort. Their paths cross with a mysterious, strikingly beautiful countess and her aide. Review: Any film that starts out with a sex scene is going to instantly grab your attention. Harry Kumel’s DAUGHTERS OF DARKNESS is no exception, playing less like a standard vampire film and more like an arthouse psychological thriller that just implies the undead manipulating the situations happening throughout the film. Delphine Seyrig is hypnotizing as Countess Bathory, giving a seductive and classy performance that hides her menace and bloodthirsty intentions. John Karlen as Stefan is also very good as a man who is repressed in many aspects of his life, causing him to be physically and sexually abusive as he gets off on the idea of death. Danielle Ouimet is stunning, but is kind of one-note as Valerie, while Andrea Rau is striking in her presence as Bathory’s familiar, Ilona. The Belgian scenery adds an exotic flair, while Kumel’s use of primary colors throughout [especially the reds and blues] are striking. What could have been a sexploitation type of "Dracula” movie ends up being more interesting and captivating than that, making DAUGHTERS OF DARKNESS one to seek out if you like sex and drama in your vampire movies. This film is definitely a vibe.DAUGHTER OF DRACULA (1972)Directed By: Jesus "Jess" FrancoStarring: Carmen Yalzade, Anne Libert, Alberto Dalbes, Howard Vernon, Daniel White, Jesus FrancoGenre: Horror/Mystery/VampiresRunning Time: 82 MinutesScore: 1.5 Howls Outta 4 (4 out of 10)Plot: Luisa is called to the bed of her dying mother Edith at Karlstein Castle. Before she dies, she tells Luisa that the Karlsteins are a family of vampires and that her ancestor, the original Count Karlstein, lies buried in the crypt. Afterwards, Luisa goes and finds the count’s coffin and discovers that he is undead. As she takes Karine, her cousin as her lover, a police inspector, Ptuschko investigates a series of killings around the town, dismissing the locals who insist these are being caused by vampires.Review: Anyone who is expecting VAMPYROS LESBOS is going to be severely disappointed, as Jess Franco’s DAUGHTER OF DRACULA is pretty much a confusing snore for much of its runtime. Despite the beautiful women, the sex that occurs between them, and a weird vampire Count who just lays in his coffin and never bothers getting out of it, the film doesn’t really have much more to offer. It wants to be a vampire film, while also trying to be a giallo, as well as going for a sexploitation incest angle between two female cousins lusting for each other - this movie never knows what it wants to be. Great Jess Franco zoom shots though, if you’re into that sort of thing. And the final few minutes are pretty cool, but it’s a chore getting there. Unless you need to see every Jess Franco movie, I wouldn’t rush out to watch this anytime soon.SANTO IN THE TREASURE OF DRACULA (1969)Directed By: René Cardona Starring: Santo, Aldo Monti, Noelia Noel, Roberto G. Rivera, Carlos Agosti, Alberto RojasGenre: Horror/Action/Science Fiction/Fantasy/Adventure/Thriller/VampiresRunning Time: 81 MinutesScore: 2.5 Howls Outta 4 (6 out of 10)Plot: A woman travels to her past life with the help of Santo’s past life regression machine.Review: What an odd Santo feature this is. So apparently Santo creates a time machine, in which he sends a female colleague back in time to live the life of an ancestor who Dracula was infatuated with. Not only that, but there’s a goon squad in the present day - led by someone in an executioner’s hood who hates guns - who wants to use the time machine to steal treasure, or something like that. The best part about this film is that this executioner guy and Santo agree on who gets to use the time machine through a wrestling match [but of course]. And then Dracula manages to enter the present day to cause trouble. Typical Santo goofiness but with a pretty chill performance by Dracula actor Aldo Monti, who would appear as other characters in later Santo features. Pretty dumb in an amusing way.THE VENGEANCE OF THE VAMPIRE WOMEN (1970)Directed By: Federico CurielStarring: Santo, Norma Lazareno, Gina Romand, Victor Junco, Aldo MontiGenre: Horror/Action/VampiresRunning Time: 85 MinutesScore: 1.5 Howls Outta 4 (4 out of 10)Plot: The vampire women of Mexico have awakened to take their revenge on the descendant of the man who destroyed them shortly after they had emigrated to Mexico during the 19th century.Review: Probably one of my least favorite Santo films I’ve watched this month, THE VENGEANCE OF THE VAMPIRE WOMEN doesn’t really live up to its wonderful title unfortunately. While there are still wrestling scenes and Santo grappling with goons to stop the evil threat that has come upon him and his friends, nothing else is really all that interesting and it feels a bit “same-old, same-old” by this point. Gina Romand is stunning as the evil Countess Mayra, with many close ups of her eyes attempting to mind control men to do her bidding. I just wish the film was more exciting, but it’s kind of slow and meanders towards the finish line. There’s also a mad scientist subplot that doesn’t help either, moving the vampire women angle to a secondary one. I think this could have been a fun Santo flick, but all I see is wasted potential. FEMALE VAMPIRE (1973)Directed By: Jesus "Jess" FrancoStarring: Lina Romay, Jack Taylor, Alice Arno, Monica Swinn, Jesus Franco, Anna WaticanGenre: Horror/VampiresRunning Time: 105 MinutesScore: 3 Howls Outta 4 (7 out of 10)Plot: A mute noblewoman’s vampiric heritage compels her to drain the life force from all of her lovers. Review: This Jess Franco film was very interesting in several ways. One, it’s more of a softcore adult movie rather than a horror film. If you ever wanted to see both female and male nudity, as well as pretty close to hardcore sex scenes, FEMALE VAMPIRE is definitely for you. Two, it doesn’t have much of a plot, but I thought Franco projected the themes of loneliness quite well. There’s a great sequence in which Irina [played by the beautiful Lina Romay] writhes on a bed against a wooden bedpost. It not only showcases how lonely she is, but it’s also quite clever since impaling herself on a wooden post for pleasure would just end up killing her probably. And three, is this the only vampire movie where people can die because of great oral sex? That’s quite a gift and a curse. I also liked the idea of a man believing he’s Irina’s soulmate, bringing down her walls and giving her hope she could overcome her vampire curse [which unfortunately doesn’t end well]. I think the film gets repetitive at times but it’s worth a look if you’re a Jess Franco fan. I do think this is one of his better works.DEAFULA (1975)Directed By: Peter WolfStarring: Peter Wolf, James Randall, Lee Darel, Dudley Hemstreet, Katherine WilsonGenre: Horror/VampiresRunning Time: 95 MinutesScore: 1.5 Howls Outta 4 (4 out of 10)Plot: A theology student finds himself turning into a vampire and hunting other students for their blood. Review: Considering all the different adaptations and perspectives on the immortal Bram Stoker novel, I shouldn’t have been surprised by a Dracula movie where all the actors are reciting their lines through American Sign Language. I think that’s a pretty cool novelty and an interesting way to see how deaf people interpret the Dracula story.Unfortunately, this Peter Wolf directorial and starring feature wouldn’t be worth mentioning if it wasn’t for the ASL aspect. I don’t mind the really low budget or the amateur takes on filmmaking here. But I watched the dubbed version, which probably didn’t help, making you realize how important scene transitions are when it comes to line reading and dialogue. There are moments where I felt Tommy Wiseau took inspiration for THE ROOM because the way characters spoke to each other was really weird. The flashback scenes weren’t edited in a pleasing way. Also, why did Dracula need a huge prosthetic nose? That was very distracting. But I did admire the twist on the vampire story and the use of religion in the final act. But overall, this didn’t do much for me and I would probably never watch this again. But I respect and I’m glad that it exists because even the hearing impaired deserve their own vampire story. So that gets points from me.

Howls of the Week (10/8/23 - 10/14/23)
This will probably be a new feature, similar to the old monthly LUNAR CYCLE I used to do. I figured I would just post quick thoughts on films I've recently seen, while giving bigger/solo spotlights to more popular/important films. Let's see how this goes.TOTALLY KILLER (2023)Directed By: Nahnatchka KhanStarring: Kiernan Shipka, Olivia Holt, Julie Bowen, Charlie Gillepsie, Lochlyn Munro, Troy Leigh-Anne Johnson, Kimberly Huie, Randall ParkGenre: Horror/Science Fiction/SlasherRunning Time: 106 MinutesScore: 3 Howls Outta 4 (7 out of 10)Plot: Thirty-five years after the shocking murders of three teens, an infamous killer returns on Halloween night to claim a fourth victim. When 17-year-old Jamie comes face-to-face with the masked maniac, she accidentally time-travels back to 1987. Forced to navigate the unfamiliar culture, Jamie teams up with her teenage mother to take down the psycho once and for all.Review: If you like FREAKY or HAPPY DEATH DAY, you'll get a kick out of Amazon's TOTALLY KILLER. While it should have used its BACK TO THE FUTURE premise better, I still had fun with it. The 80s needle drops are always welcomed, the characters were colorful and the mystery of the killer kept me guessing [decent twist at the end]. I wish Kiernan Shipka’s character didn't keep mentioning how things in the 80s were problematic like they are in 2023. Saying it once or twice is fine, but every five to ten minutes wasn’t necessary. I also wish the film was a bit funnier. Still, I didn’t feel like I wasted my time.PET SEMATARY: BLOODLINES (2023)Directed By: Lindsey BeerStarring: Jackson White, Forest Goodluck, Jack Mulhurn, Henry Thomas, Natalie Anne Lynd, Isabella Star LeBlanc, Pam Grier, David Duchovny, Samantha MathisGenre: Horror/Science Fiction/Fantasy/ZombiesRunning: 87 MinutesScore: 1 Howl Outta 4 (3 out of 10)Plot: In 1969, a young Jud Crandall has dreams of leaving his hometown of Ludlow, Maine behind, but soon discovers sinister secrets buried within and is forced to confront a dark family history that will forever keep him connected to Ludlow. Review: The less said about PET SEMATARY: BLOODLINES, the better. 87 minutes and felt longer than that, as I had to sit through multiple sittings just to get through this. Great actors [Pam Grier, Henry Thomas, Samantha Mathis, David Duchovny] were wasted in their roles. The story dragged towards an unsatisfying resolution. The novel and even the ‘89 version told this story in a more effective way in a much lesser time span. I wasn’t the biggest fan of the 2019 remake, but I thought maybe this prequel could have improved on that. The people behind this forced franchise should realize that sometimes, dead is better. SHE CAME FROM THE WOODS (2022)Directed By: Erik Bloomquist Starring: Cara Buono, Clare Foley, Spencer List, William Sadler, Michael Park, Tyler Elliot BurkeGenre: Horror/Supernatural/SlasherRunning Time: 101 MinutesScore: 3 Howls Outta 4 (7 out of 10)Plot: In 1987, a group of counselors accidentally unleashes a decades’ old evil on the last night of summer camp.Review: Caught this modern slasher on Tubi before it left the service and I dug it quite a bit. Set in 1987 [besides the modern language and the appearance of an Apple Watch - whoops], this supernatural slasher involves a camp being terrorized by a watch who possesses children and campers after a ritual gone wrong. Good performances [Cara Buono and William Sadler especially], decent gore effects considering its small budget and a lore that’s nicely built but doesn’t end in a real satisfactory way makes this one worth looking for whenever it pops back up on Tubi or another streaming service. Recommended for FRIDAY THE 13TH, THE BURNING and MADMAN fans.DRACULA'S DAUGHTER (1936)Directed By: Lambert HillyerStarring: Gloria Holden, Otto Kruger, Marguerite Churchill, Irving Pichel, Gilbert Emery, Edward Van SloanGenre: Horror/Drama/Fantasy/VampiresRunning Time: 71 MinutesScore: 3 Howls Outta 4 (7 out of 10)Plot: A countess from Transylvania seeks a psychiatrist’s help to cure her vampiric cravings. Review: The first sequel to the immortal 1931 Universal Studios classic DRACULA, I slightly like this film more due to the filmmaking style. This feels more like a real movie than the stagey DRACULA does. The story with the Countess dealing with not wanting to be like her father, trying to find ways to stop being a vampire, was actually pretty interesting, Plus for a film from this era, having a lesbian angle was quite brave and surprising in a good way. I thought the performances were okay, with only Gloria Holden really standing out as the title character. And learning she hated being in this film because she thought she was above the material, it makes her performance stronger and more legit in my opinion. Plus, the film is short and sweet and doesn’t overstay its welcome.BLOOD OF DRACULA (1957)Directed By: Herbert L. StrockStarring: Sandra Harrison, Louise Lewis, Gail Ganley, Mary Adams, Malcolm Afterbury, Barbara Wilson, Lynn AldenGenre: Horror/VampiresRunning Time: 69 MinutesScore: 2 Howls Outta 4 (5 out of 10)Plot: A crazed teacher at a respectable girls’ school draws power from a medallion she has obtained from the Carpathian Mountains, and uses it to experiment telepathically on the school’s newest young pupil.Review: Pretty much the same template as I WAS A TEENAGE WEREWOLF, this “vampire” movie feels more like a teen drama with supernatural elements in it. Honestly, this film didn’t do a whole lot for me. It sort of meanders towards the finish line, with the main character being hypnotized and controlled by her teacher, for whatever reason, until we see the main reveal in the last moments of the movie. I thought the main character’s relationship with her father and her indifferent stepmother was interesting at the start, but it just felt flatter as the movie rolled on. Not bad, but nothing I would rush out to watch again.THE VAMPIRE LOVERS (1970)Directed By: Roy Ward BakerStarring: Ingrid Pitt, Peter Cushing, George Cole, Kate O'Mara, Ferdy Mayne, Douglas Wilmer, Madeline Smith, Pippa SteelGenre: Horror/VampiresRunning Time: 91 MinutesScore: 3 Howls Outta 4 (7 out of 10)Plot: In the heart of Styria the Karnstein Family, even after their mortal deaths, rise from their tombs spreading evil in the countryside in their lust for fresh blood. Baron Hartog whose family are all victims of Karnstein vampirism, opens their graves and drives a stake through their diabolical hearts. One grave he cannot locate is that of the legendary beautiful Mircalla Karnstein. Years of peace follow that grisly night until Mircalla reappears to avenge her family’s decimation and satisfy her desire for blood.Review: Part of the Karnstein trilogy, this Hammer production is quite titillating with its lesbian undertones and an Ingrid Pitt performance that commands the spotlight and captivates the audience. Nicely paced, with a Gothic atmosphere and good performances that balance the horror with the melodrama. Probably not one of the best Hammer films out there, or even one I would think of whenever the studio is brought up. Yet, this one is definitely worth watching if you’re into sexy vampires.TWINS OF EVIL (1971)Directed By: John HoughStarring: Peter Cushing, Dennis Price, Madeleine Collinson, Mary Collinson, Isobel Black, Kathleen Byron, David WarbeckGenre: Horror/VampiresRunning Time: 87 MinutesScore: 3 Howls Outta 4 (8 out of 10)Plot: While dabbling in Satanism, Count Karstein resurrects Mircalla Karnstein who initiates him into vampirism. As a rash of deaths afflicts the village, Gustav the head of Puritan group leads his men to seek out and destroy the pestilence. One of his twin nieces has become inflicted with the witchcraft but Gustav’s zeal and venom has trapped the innocent Maria, threatening her with a tortuous execution, whilst Frieda remains free to continue her orgy of evil.Review: The third film of Hammer’s Karnstein’s trilogy, I thought TWINS OF EVIL was a lot more fun to watch than THE VAMPIRE LOVERS. Better action. Better effects. More compelling performances, especially by Peter Cushing, David Warbeck and the Collinson twins. The title is misleading [only one evil twin really] and it isn’t as titillating as THE VAMPIRE LOVERS. But I liked this film quite a lot and would definitely watch this again.SANTO VS. THE VAMPIRE WOMEN (1962)Directed By: Alfonso Corona BlakeStarring: Santo, Lorena Velazquez, Maria Duval, Jaime Fernandez, Augusto Benedico, Ofelia Montesco, Xavier LojaGenre: Horror/Action/Fantasy/Vampires/WerewolvesRunning Time: 89 MinutesScore: 2 Howls Outta 4 (5 out of 10)Plot: A professor recruits a professional wrestler to protect his daughter from vampires intent on kidnapping her and marrying her to the devil.Review: If you’ve ever watched a horror film starring Lucha Libre star Santo [or Samson in the English dubbing], you know exactly what you’re getting. Silly, campy and just oddball story and action involving a coven of female vampires and their male minions who want to kidnap the daughter of someone who escaped their grasp many years prior. The grandfather hires Santo to protect her, leading to many goofy action scenes, including a wrestling one involving a vampire/werewolf person(?). Considering this was an episode of MST3K, I don’t think the film is that bad that it earned that honor. While pretty dumb, the dubbing is actually funny and the action scenes are amusing. Plus I thought the final act was a lot of fun, especially with Santo driving that sweet convertible. Better than what its reputation would tell you, to be quite honest.

The Exorcist: Believer (2023)
DIRECTED BYDavid Gordon GreenSTARRINGLeslie Odom Jr. - Victor FieldingAnn Dowd - AnnJennifer Nettles - MirandaNorbert Leo Butz - TonyLidya Jewett - Angela FieldingOlivia Marcum - KatherineEllen Burstyn - Chris MacNeilGenre - Horror/Supernatural/Possession/DemonsRunning Time - 111 MinutesPLOTSince the death of his wife 12 years ago, Victor Fielding has raised their daughter, Angela on his own. But when Angela and her friend Katherine disappear in the woods, only to return three days later with no memory of what happened to them, it unleashes a chain of events that will force Victor to confront the nadir of evil and, in his terror and desperation, seek out the only person alive who has witnessed anything like it before: Chris MacNeil.REVIEWFifty years ago, a William Peter Blatty bestselling novel called The Exorcist was adapted to movie screens by William Friedkin. THE EXORCIST scared the bejesus out of people, it made tons of money and it racked up a bunch of award nominations - making it one of the first horror films to do so. It has maintained its legacy as not only one of the best horror films to ever exist, but a masterpiece of cinema, period. With every great success, there’s always a follow up. From good continuations to the original story [THE EXORCIST III, the FOX television show] to not-so-good ones [EXORCIST II: THE HERETIC and those two prequels I can barely remember], there has always been an attempt to revive this franchise without much success compared to its slasher counterparts. But that didn’t stop Jason Blum and Universal Studios from winning a bidding war and paying an enormous $400 million for the rights.Seeing the success they had with reviving Michael Myers, Laurie Strode and the HALLOWEEN franchise with a trilogy that had varying degrees of acclaim, the producers felt that the new HALLOWEEN trilogy director, David Gordon Green, could do the same kind of magic with THE EXORCIST. Already announced as a new trilogy for the franchise, THE EXORCIST: BELIEVER was released for the Halloween season with not a whole lot of anticipation for it. After all, not many people clamored for a new EXORCIST. And after watching a couple of trailers and seeing that they dragged out one of the stars of the first film back, Academy Award Winner Ellen Burstyn, many started to feel less excited and more worried about the original getting tarnished with another subpar sequel. And unfortunately, as far as I’m concerned, there’s not much to believe in when it comes to BELIEVER.Let’s get the good stuff out of the way. I thought the first half of this movie was actually pretty solid. It obviously sets up the events of the second half of the film, but the first fifty minutes or so are the most compelling and interesting. It focuses on the main characters, mainly the Fielding family - consisting of a single dad who lost his pregnant wife in an earthquake while vacationing in Haiti, and his daughter who survived the impact of the earthquake but resulted in the loss of her mother. We get to see their dynamic and how much Victor, the father, cares for Angela despite being a bit overprotective. She wants to spend more time away from home with her friend Katherine, who is the daughter of very religious parents - the total opposite of Victor, who lost his faith when his wife passed. Angela and Katherine head into the woods to do some sort of seance to contact Angela’s mother, which only sets off an evil chain of events that the families will never recover from. The girls become more demonic as they’re possessed, the parents start blaming each other until they realize they have to work together to solve the issue, and bring in characters old and new to exorcize the demons out of these two teenagers.The first half of the film plays out like a true crime, missing persons type of movie. While we know what happened to both Angela and Katherine, we don’t really know how and why. Why were these two girls targeted? Is Pazuzu the demon possessing these girls, or is it another malevolent being? Priests struggled with one person being possessed. What chance do they have with two at once? Especially when the two girls are in sync by the same demon? I was interested because this is a new twist on a familiar story. It allowed the characters to develop into people we can kind of connect with, while wondering how they were going to overcome this when the demon is only willing to let one of the girls to survive over the other, making the parents have to choose both their fates. There’s a good story here and I think if handled better, this could have been a top notch EXORCIST movie.I also felt the performances were really good. In particular, I thought both Leslie Odom Jr. and Lidya Jewett as Victor and Angela Fielding were the best of the lot. Odom Jr. has always been a solid actor and he plays the confused and grieving husband and father well. He has a presence that works well here. Jewett is also very sweet as Angela, which is great because she’s the total opposite once she’s possessed. I also thought the other young actress, Olivia Marcum as Katherine, is also very good. I don’t think she had much of a presence when she was normal, but once she’s possessed, she’s a standout. She reminded me of Linda Blair’s performance in the first film in many ways, which I appreciated. I also thought Ann Dowd was a highlight as Ann, a nurse who was previously a nun-in-training with a sinful past. She’s probably the best supporting actor here, bringing some gravitas and bringing some needed emotion during the last part of the film.I also thought the cinematography by Michael Simmonds was nice. It did remind me of the three previous HALLOWEEN films, but I thought the movie had some really nice shots. This is probably the best looking EXORCIST movie, even though I’m sure some will feel it looks a bit too polished. But I thought his handling of the visuals established many things well, especially the use of light and shadow at times.Unfortunately, that is all of the positivity I have for THE EXORCIST: BELIEVER. The biggest sin this film has is that it’s pretty silly once Ellen Burstyn pops in as the returning Chris MacNeil - the mother of the first film’s victim Regan. Folks, here we have the perfect example of how not to use a returning Legacy Character to a franchise. Unlike a Laurie Strode, or the trio of Sydney, Dewey and Gale, or hell, even the return of Sally Hardesty to Netflix’s TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE reboot from last year, Chris MacNeil has no purpose in this film other than for audiences to remember the first movie. A wonderful actress, Burstyn is given some of the worst dialogue in the film. She also looks quite bored and annoyed to be in this movie, even though she received a big paycheck for returning. And what David Gordon Green and his co-writers did to Chris in BELIEVER really shocked me and upset me. It just felt so unnecessary and pointless, because nothing in this film would change much if this character wasn’t involved. It felt like a disservice to the character, the actress, the creators of the character and the fans who loved the first film and hold it in high regard. It’s nice seeing Burstyn and another returning character [who cameos at the end] again in their famous roles. And unless both characters have a substantial part in the next film or two, what’s the point of using an important character like this? It’s pretty insulting.Then we have the obvious exorcism itself, which felt like a Cliff Notes version of what we saw in the first film. The only difference is that the demon isn’t as foul-mouthed, there are two girls instead of one and there’s a whole bunch of religious folks trying to exorcize the demon rather than just a priest or two. I saw many call this group the “Exorcist Avengers” and they actually feel like that. I thought having people from different faiths to battle one demon was a cool idea, since each faith has a different method or interpretation on possession and dealing with demonic presences. But the film never really goes too deep in differentiating the respective methods, so I was missing some of the conflict and drama of possibly one person feeling their faith was better suited over the other. I guess it was refreshing to see people of different religions coming together rather than arguing about whose God is better, so I shouldn’t complain too much about that.What I can complain about is how rushed the whole exorcist process is in this film. It feels forced in because this is an EXORCIST movie, but unlike the first film, there’s no real tension or drama. Well, that’s not completely true. There is a moment where the demon reveals that only one girl can survive the exorcism, making the respective parents choose which one to save and which one to let go. This is a great plot twist that would have created a ton of drama and tension amongst the characters. Who will they choose? If they do choose, is the demon going to keep its promise? Is there any way to save both? Will the parents do something stupid to insure their respective child survives over the other? Possibilities were there. There’s also a hint of anti-abortion rhetoric if you want to dig deep into that, which I didn’t really notice until I thought about things after the fact. There are a lot of interesting subplots that could have really enhanced the last half of this movie.Instead, choosing a child lasts about five minutes. There’s no drama or suspense. There’s a bit of a twist but it doesn’t have enough of an impact to make you feel anything. The secret that’s revealed for one of the main characters doesn’t really go anywhere, unless that’s being saved for the next film. It all felt like a missed opportunity because there isn’t enough time given for these plotlines to sink in for the audience. This is like having a quickie when you’re looking for foreplay. Sometimes you want more out of your horror movie, especially if it’s a sequel to one of the best horror films of all time.I think David Gordon Green needs to step back from directing horror films for a while and maybe just remain as a screenwriter or producer. I don’t think his filmmaking is terrible or anything, but it never feels inspired in BELIEVER. If I didn’t know this was a continuation to THE EXORCIST, the look of the film makes you think you’re still in Haddonfield, making you wait for either Michael or Laurie to pop up. The film is never scary. There are a couple of jump scares, but none of them worked on me or the audience I was with. While Green is good with his setups and first halves of this movies, he tends to do way too much with his second halves and rushes through their conclusions. I also appreciated the nods to the first film, but they feel limp compared to what Friedkin did. I feel if you’re going to make an EXORCIST movie, go all out with it. As much as I think EXORCIST II is a worse film than this one, at least that film is memorable. THE FINAL HOWLTHE EXORCIST: BELIEVER pretty much met all of my low expectations, not doing much in adding to the legacy of an iconic horror film from fifty years ago. The film is kind of dull for the most part, as it's not scary nor does it have tension or suspense. The exorcism portion feels like a watered down version of what we’ve seen before [in this franchise and other exorcism movies] despite having more characters involved. There are subplots that pop up in the final half that could have elevated this movie, but are rushed through without leaving much of an impact or excitement for the next installment. David Gordon Green’s direction isn’t all that different from what he did with his HALLOWEEN trilogy, even if the cinematography is quite nice. And the use of Ellen Burstyn - the less said about it, the better.That being said, the acting is quite good - in particular Leslie Odom Jr, the two possessed girls [Lidya Jewett and Olivia Marcum] and Ann Dowd as a nurse with a past. The first half, which plays out like a true crime/missing persons type of movie, is actually quite compelling as it builds character development and sets up for what’s to come. And as I mentioned, the look of the film is nice.Other than that, THE EXORCIST: BELIEVER isn’t the best possession movie of 2023. Hell, it’s not even the best film with the word “Exorcist” in the title this year [hey Russell Crowe]. I don’t think this is the worst film in the franchise, but at least EXORCIST II: THE HERETIC had balls. Maybe David Gordon Green or whoever could add some for THE EXORCIST: DECEIVER in 2025. The power of Christ doesn’t compel me to be excited for whatever comes next. What a shame.SCORE1.5 Howls Outta 4(4 out of 10)

Saw X (2023)
DIRECTED BYKevin GreutertSTARRINGTobin Bell - John Kramer/JigsawShawnee Smith - Amanda YoungSynnøve Macody Lund - Cecilia PedersonSteven Brand - Parker SmithRenata Vaca - GabriellaJoshua Okamoto - DiegoOctavio Hinojosa - MateoGenre - Horror/ThrillerRunning Time - 118 MinutesPLOTBetween the events of SAW and SAW II, a sick and desperate John Kramer travels to Mexico for a risky and experimental medical procedure in hopes of a miracle cure for his cancer, only to discover the entire operation is a scam to defraud the most vulnerable. Armed with a newfound purpose, the infamous serial killer returns to his work, turning the tables on the con artists in his signature visceral way through devious, deranged, and ingenious traps.REVIEWAs I had mentioned in my previous review for 2021’s SPIRAL: FROM THE BOOK OF SAW, the hype train for this year’s SAW X made me eager to watch the newest installment considering the last few were either mid [JIGSAW] or pretty awful [SAW 3D, SPIRAL]. While the trailers made the film look like “been there, done that”, the Rotten Tomatoes score and even the positive word-of-mouth made me curious as to why this film was getting so highly praised when some of my other favorites in the series weren’t really. What’s so special about the tenth installment of a divisive horror franchise that has both critics and fans being so positive on it?While I didn’t feel we actually needed another SAW film, I was anticipating it somewhat for a few reasons. The biggest reason was the returns of both Tobin Bell and Shawnee Smith to the franchise, as SPIRAL proved that a SAW film without Tobin Bell’s presence doesn’t really work in the story’s favor. The film also saw the return of director-editor Kevin Greutert - the man who directed one of the best SAW films [SAW VI] and the worst one in the franchise [SAW 3D]. Also, the film would be a direct sequel of the first SAW, while being a prequel for SAW II, which I found intriguing. But having a film in-between two of the best films in the series upped its potential. I mean, this new film had to be better than the last few, right? What I didn’t expect was how much better it was than the last few. In fact, I think SAW X is the best film since the first film and proves that there is still a lot of life in this series.I think what makes SAW X a huge success is having Tobin Bell back as John “Jigsaw” Kramer. SAW X belongs to him, as he carries the film successfully to the finish line with a performance that exceeds anything he had done previously in the franchise. Bell is helped by a really good screenplay, for once, that allows him to really dig deep into his character and flesh him out in ways that he wasn’t allowed to before. Honestly, the first act of SAW X plays out as a character study or drama that highlights John Kramer’s struggles with brain cancer, hoping for some kind of cure while, at the same time, he attempts to do the same for others with his “games”. He goes to meetings for those suffering with cancer. He’s heartbroken when doctors tell him that his cancer is terminal and he should be preparing for his last few months of life. And when someone from his meetings tells him of this procedure that could cure him of his cancer with experimental drugs that the FDA won’t approve of, we watch Kramer become hopeful as he’s less focused on “saving others” and more focused on saving himself and living his best life. Unfortunately, this is a SAW movie and we learn that this miracle cure is nothing but a scam to steal thousands of dollars from his account. This only makes Kramer a vengeful man who is here to teach those who gave him false hope a taste of their own medicine.While there have been moments in the franchise that have tried to make John Kramer more of a sympathetic figure, especially when it concerned his wife Jill and the lost of their child, SAW X is really the first time where the filmmakers want the audience to be on Jigsaw’s side without any semblance of doubt. Kramer is fleshed out here as a human being who has been wronged by very evil people who used his illness to make themselves a bit richer without caring about conning a dying man. Each one of the participants rightfully deserves to be punished by making a choice, always keeping us on Kramer’s side when he puts them through some gruesome traps. He’s the ultimate anti-hero this time around, making us understand his motives and justification for his actions without questioning them. He’s not just a villain with a bunch of catchphrases, or a specter of the past who appears in flashbacks to move the plot along. Jigsaw is the main character here and SAW X lets us in on the man behind all the mean-spirited games in a well told way. It’s actually pretty refreshing because it lets Tobin Bell finally use his acting chops to create a more compelling character the audience hadn’t been privy to before. He’s incredible here and it’s definitely his best performance within the franchise. I also appreciated the return of Amanda Young, who is without question the best Jigsaw apprentice in the entire franchise. While I still feel Shawnee Smith’s best acting role was in 2006’s SAW III, where she really got to play with Amanda’s mental state and resentment over how Jigsaw treated her, I do think Smith does get some nice emotional beats in SAW X as well. Amanda is a bit more playful and sarcastic in this film, while maintaining her grief over Kramer’s condition and not wanting to continue his mission without him. Bell and Smith share some nice private moments together and display their usually great chemistry as they just talk as mentor and student, with both actors bringing a lot of gravitas and conviction with their respective characters. We get a deeper understanding of their relationship and how important each one is to the other, like a father wanting to pass on his work to his daughter, who has no idea how to move on without him. Smith also gives Amanda a bit of a conscience that we’ve never seen before, as one of the participants is a former drug addict and Amanda feels a bit conflicted about punishing her. It causes a bit of strife between her and Kramer, which seems to explain their interactions in SAW III, where the two felt at odds at times due to Kramer’s deteriorating condition in that film. I thought both Bell and Smith elevated this film a lot.The other characters might not get as much depth, but they are given enough of a background story to understand where they come from and their reasons for being a part of this evil scheme. Some are downright cold and don’t care about what they’ve done. Others display more guilt and try to plead with both Kramer and Amanda to give them a second chance to make things right. The actors all play their roles well. But in particular, Synnøve Macody Lund as Dr. Cecilia Pederson and Renata Vaca as drug addict Gabriella are the standouts and really make us either hate their characters or see how desperate they were to the point where we kind of feel bad for them, but not really at the same time. Lund is really fantastic as the film’s main villain, as she evolves her character with her fantastic performance. I’ve never watched a character in this film who deserved to play one of Jigsaw’s games more than Dr. Pederson did.As for the traps, I don’t think they’re the most memorable or fleshiest traps in the franchise. But man, it’s been a long while where I’ve watched a SAW film and actually cringe and felt uncomfortable at times. If you enjoy eyeball violence, limbs getting amputated, self-imposed brain surgery and a see-saw involving drowning, you’ll get a kick out of SAW X. The final act, in particular, is pretty damn great with one trap leading right into the twist trap at the end. I thought it was all really clever and satisfying as a viewer. The audience in the theater I was in pretty much clapped and hollered during the last ten to fifteen minutes. One of the best scripts in the entire series for sure.Kevin Greutert probably directed his best SAW feature with this movie as well. It has some of the trademarks you’d expect. Flashing images and editing during the traps. Some of the typical SAW filters we’ve been accustomed to. And a showcase of violence that Greutert has no issue displaying for us to see, making us all glad we didn’t piss off Jigsaw. But I gotta say - I thought for a SAW movie, Greutert showed a lot of restraint visually, allowing the story and the actors to be more of a focus than the horror itself. The first half of the film feels more like a drama rather than horror movie, with no distracting editing or annoying flashbacks that distract from the main story. Greutert lets things breathe, allowing Tobin Bell and the other actors to do their thing before leading us into the second, and more traditional, half that we’ve come to expect with a SAW film. The difference in quality between SAW 3D and SAW X is staggering. You’d think each film was from a different director and not the same person. If they ever do another SAW film for whatever reason, I think Greutert needs to stay on because he did a wonderful job on this.Were there issues? As with every SAW sequel, there are always plot-holes and things that happen that make you question how or why they do. Some of the minor characters could have been more fleshed for their arcs to have a bigger impact. And honestly, seeing both Tobin Bell and Shawnee Smith look much older while playing characters from almost twenty years ago was very jarring at first, but you don’t really notice it much once things start to kick into high gear. Bell, in particular, is playing a character who is dying anyway. So looking older actually works and I think deaging them with CGI would have made things look weird anyway. I did have a major gripe with Shawnee Smith’s wig. That looked really bad and it was a distraction whenever she was on. It was a choice, that’s for sure.THE FINAL HOWLIn one of the biggest movie surprises of the year, SAW X destroyed all expectations I had for it. Tobin Bell carries the film wonderfully from beginning to end, finally allowed to really use his acting chops to flesh out a villain and turn him into a sympathetic anti-hero who is completely justified for his actions. Shawnee Smith also brings the goods, making Amanda more human, while Synnøve Macody Lund is solid as the film’s true villain with her character’s evolution. SAW X also contains an actual narrative that allows characters to have depth, taking time with the situations presented and allowing the audience to invest themselves into the story regardless if they have prior history with the franchise or not. I also appreciated Kevin Greutert redeeming himself from the terrible SAW 3D with a subtle visual presentation that maintains some of the SAW trademarks [flashy editing, that SAW filter] but proving less is more as he directs more of a drama feel with the film’s first half before going into the typical SAW horror scenario in the second. This felt less like a chapter within a universe and more of an actual movie that’s trying to be its own thing and actually achieve a level of quality this franchise hasn’t seen in quite a while. I was really impressed that a tenth film in a horror franchise could be so damn good, that it pretty much trumps anything that came after the first film. I’m hoping this is the last SAW film, so the series can go out on a high note. But money talks, so…SCORE3.5 Howls Outta 4(9 out of 10)

Spiral: From the Book of Saw (2021)
DIRECTED BYDarren Lynn BousmanSTARRINGChris Rock - Detective Zeke BanksMax Minghella - Detective William SchenkSamuel L. Jackson - Marcus BanksMarisol Nichols - Captain Angie GarzaDaniel Petronijevic - Detective Marv “Boz” BozwickGenre - Horror/Mystery/Thriller/CrimeRunning Time - 93 MinutesPLOTWorking in the shadow of an esteemed police veteran, brash Detective Ezekiel “Zeke” Banks and his rookie partner take charge of a grisly investigation into murders that are eerily reminiscent of the city’s gruesome past. Unwittingly entrapped in a deepening mystery, Zeke finds himself at the center of the killer’s morbid game.REVIEWWith the return of the SAW franchise with SAW X this weekend, I’ve been going back and rewatching the entire franchise from the beginning. If you’ve been following this blog for many years, you know I’m a big fan of the first three films, as well as the surprisingly solid SAW VI [the one dealing with health insurance]. The rest of the installments stem from being a bit above average to just dull or awful, with convoluted storylines and messing with the timeline to repetitive effects. While not many loved it, I thought 2018’s JIGSAW was a step in the right direction after the awful SAW 3D, which wrapped things up in a clumsy, cheap note. But the film didn’t set the box office on fire, so Lionsgate decided to go into a different direction for the series’ ninth installment.2021’s SPIRAL: FROM THE BOOK OF SAW is the only film in the franchise I hadn’t watched prior to rewatching every single film in the series this month. It’s not like I didn’t have a curiosity about it. After all, getting both Chris Rock and Samuel L. Jackson in a SAW movie will pique anyone’s interest. What amazes me is that SPIRAL was an idea by Rock himself, being a huge SAW fan and wanting to contribute to the franchise by taking things into a different direction while still maintaining elements that make the franchise what it is. Jackson joined because horror wasn’t a genre he was specifically known for and wanted to try things he hadn’t done. Other actors, who were fans of the franchise, won out roles that weren’t meant for them by impressing Lionsgate executives.With this much level of care and focus, you’d think SPIRAL would kick off a new era for the SAW series with some self-contained stories not involving John Kramer aka “The Jigsaw Killer”. Making SPIRAL more of a police procedural and mystery with “torture porn” elements included should have brought new life into a franchise that was, let’s be honest, long in the tooth by this point and had pretty much milked itself dry. Unfortunately, SPIRAL had a few things going against it.One, it was released in the summer of 2021. Theaters had just started to really open again after COVID-19 had pretty much shut everything down for over a year. People were still too scared to head inside a theater with other people, feeling a movie was not a good reason to get a life-threatening illness - especially when vaccines had just started to roll out for it.Two, there probably wasn’t much interest in another SAW film at the time. Despite the stunt casting and a new take on a tired story, fans probably figured they could just wait until the film hit streaming and digital. And three, SPIRAL isn’t that good of a movie. Critics were mixed on it. Fans didn’t really have much positive feedback to provide. And after watching it, SPIRAL is a film that has a ton of potential and interesting ideas, but doesn’t really know what to do with any of them.After two years of hyping myself to finally sit down and watch SPIRAL, I couldn’t believe how disappointed I felt once the film concluded. There was so much potential here to make the film something special within the franchise. Considering the capable cast, a returning director who helmed two of the best entries in the series, and a good idea to reboot a tired franchise, SPIRAL should have been better than it actually is. While I don’t think it’s the worst entry in the series [it’s super close though], even the worst movie [SAW 3D] had a goofy, awful charm about it that makes it sort of rewatchable. I don’t think SPIRAL even has that, despite the film being better made.Let’s get the good stuff out of the way. I appreciate and respect the fact that SPIRAL wants to be its own thing, while taking what was established into a new direction. It’s definitely the right move to make, considering that the main villain has been long dead and all these apprentices that were never revealed until the story finds it convenient just makes the newer installments lesser than the films that came before it. Having a copycat Jigsaw killer with their own puppet, going after corrupt cops for a believable reason that’s revealed in the final act, is a fascinating idea that could have set up several films. You can kind of understand the villain’s motives, which could have been extended into other movies if SPIRAL had done better. While the script itself isn’t great, the narrative idea is interesting and should have elevated the franchise.I also thought the traps, while not as elaborate as previous ones in the SAW series, weren’t too bad. Considering this was a copycat who wanted revenge on crooked police officers, there is less focus on morality and trying to help others appreciate their lives. So these traps were definitely intended to really hurt, or even murder, the victims. I thought the first trap with the tongue was good, especially the gory aftermath. I even liked the glass one near the end. The rest were fine, I guess. The wax one was kind of lame, but the trap that stretched out parts of the body was an interesting concept. These were probably the weakest traps in the entire series, but I like the intent for each one.I also thought some of the cast were good in their roles. Samuel L. Jackson was probably the best, playing a subtle version of the role he usually plays. He’s not in the film a whole lot, but makes the most of every appearance. And his acting in the film’s final act is pretty good. I also liked Riverdale’s Marisol Nichols as the police captain. She had the right mix of toughness and vulnerability that made her believable. And Max Minghella was good as the rookie detective who unfortunately gets caught up in this whole copycat scenario. He carried himself well for the most part.As for the rest, what the hell happened here? The screenplay is not good at all, with cringey dialogue and the biggest group of unlikable characters I’ve seen in this series yet. Despite Chris Rock’s Zeke supposedly being the protagonist of the film, he comes across as bitter, overly angry and just a person you would never want to know. I understand bad things have happened to him due to his crooked co-workers, but there’s no sympathy for a man who acts like a jerk to pretty much everyone. Even when he’s given choices to be a better person, he still acts like a prick. If Rock had intended his character to be the main hero of a new trilogy or something, then I’m glad SPIRAL didn’t do well at the box office.Let’s not even talk about his co-workers, who all hate Zeke for snitching on one of their own. For police officers, they only care about themselves and their brotherhood rather than doing the right thing and helping their lead detective solve the mystery of a new serial killer ruining lives. None of them are likable, always acting or looking shifty as hell. In fact, most of the detectives in this franchise seem like the worst people to know in this universe. None of these characters have any depth either, which makes me not care about any of them. The only likable person is the rookie Schenk, because he genuinely cares about solving this mystery and listens to Zeke to make that happen. It makes him stick out from the rest.It also doesn’t help that you can solve the mystery within the first half hour of the movie. I pretty much called who the new Jigsaw was pretty early on, with only the motive being questioned. For a movie trying to build a mystery and shock its audience with a twist in the final act, it’s very underwhelming when you call it almost at the start. I thought the motivation and reasoning for the copycat was pretty good, but I wish I was more surprised by who it was.I also thought Darren Lynn Bousman’s direction wasn’t all that good either. I’m really surprised since I enjoyed his previous films in the franchise, as well as REPO! THE GENETIC OPERA. But I wasn’t feeling it here. The editing is really weird, especially the ending of the film that pissed me off so much, I actually lowered the original score I was planning on giving this movie. The most action-oriented scenes don’t feel exciting. The traps aren’t shot in a way that would make you cringe or feel a certain way other than pretty bored. There’s like no tension or suspense at all, which is terrible for a mystery-thriller. I thought the gorier stuff was shot well and the quieter moments were stronger than most. But as a complete movie, it felt very off to me. Maybe that was intentional to make it feel separate from the main SAW films while maintaining its position as part of the series. I just found Bousman’s direction bland, which is alarming because I think he’s one of the better directors to work on this franchise. As for Chris Rock, I really wanted to like him in the main role of Detective Zeke. But I think he tried too hard to be this bad ass cop that it made his performance unintentionally amusing for all the wrong reasons. When he tries to act tough, it doesn’t feel real. It’s like he’s doing a skit on Saturday Night Live or something. His attempts at humor feel really dated. A TWILIGHT joke, really? In 2021? Even when he tries to act afraid, something about it just comes across as phony to me. I do think he has good moments with Marisol Nichols, Samuel L. Jackson and Max Minghella, only because he’s acting natural in those quieter one-on-one scenes. While I appreciate Rock for wanting to be part of a series he loved and his attempt to create something fresh to keep the franchise going for a new generation, I think he was severely miscast in the lead role. And despite being part of the SAW series, I thought SPIRAL felt pretty tame considering having traps that were more gruesome than the ones in JIGSAW. At least JIGSAW had a constant energy going for it, keeping me engaged the entire time. SPIRAL seems to be figuring out its own identity throughout its runtime, which doesn’t make for a pleasant experience watching it.THE FINAL HOWLDespite a capable cast, a director who helmed two of the better installments, and a story idea that could have been the focus of future entries if it had succeeded commercially, SPIRAL: FROM THE BOOK OF SAW just comes across as a massive disappointment. I respect Chris Rock and Lionsgate for wanting to take the series into a new, fresher direction while maintaining what makes the franchise what it is. I appreciate the producers for wanting to build a new mystery that builds on The Jigsaw Killer. While probably the weakest traps in the franchise, I still like most of the concepts and thought the aftermath of each were pretty memorable. And some of the actors [Samuel L. Jackson, Marisol Nichols and Max Minghella] were quite good in their respective roles.But man, SPIRAL has a disappointing mystery you can solve within a half hour of the movie. Ninety-five percent of the characters are so unlikable, including the film’s really frustrating main character, that you don’t care about any of them. Darren Lynn Bousman’s direction isn’t the greatest either. With odd editing, no suspense or tension [this is a thriller, right?], and an ending that made me so angry that it caused me to lower my original score, this is surprisingly not Bousman’s best turn as a filmmaker. And Chris Rock, despite him trying to play things as serious and tough as possible, just doesn’t come across as believable as a detective who is trying to solve a crime without much help from his crooked co-workers. This is one of the biggest miscasts for a lead actor I’ve seen in quite a while.Thankfully the hype and positive reception to SAW X has kept my appreciation for this franchise intact, because SPIRAL almost destroyed that once those end credits rolled. Close to the worst film in the series, as far as I’m concerned. The epitome of wasted potential.SCORE1.5 Howls Outta 4(4 out of 10)

The Exorcist III (1990)
DIRECTED BYWilliam Peter BlattySTARRINGGeorge C. Scott - Lieutenant William F. Kinderman Ed Flanders - Father Joseph DyerJason Miller - Patient X / Damien KarrasScott Wilson - Dr. TempleBrad Dourif - James Venamun / The "Gemini Killer"Genre - Horror/Mystery/Crime/Demons/Possession/Serial KillersRunning Time - 110 MinutesPLOTSet fifteen years after the original film, THE EXORCIST III centers around the philosophical Lieutenant William F. Kinderman who is investigating a baffling series of murders around Georgetown that all contain the hallmarks of The Gemini, a deceased serial killer. It eventually leads him to a catatonic patient in a psychiatric hospital who has recently started to speak, claiming he is the The Gemini and detailing the murders, but bears a striking resemblance to Father Damien Karras.REVIEWWith THE EXORCIST: BELIEVER coming to theaters in a couple of weeks, I’ve been revisiting THE EXORCIST franchise to get hyped up for a sequel/reboot that will probably won’t live to even the lowest expectations. The first film from 1973 still holds up exceptionally as a horror classic. THE HERETIC: EXORCIST II from 1977 would be appreciated as some sort of camp and so-bad-it’s-good movie if it wasn’t for the fact that it’s meant to be the sequel to an absolute masterpiece. Talk about a massive disappointment, although there are some out there who appreciate it for the trash that it is.Despite the horror genre waning in popularity amongst the mainstream during the late 1980s and early 1990s, Hollywood decided it was time to step back into the world of THE EXORCIST. In 1990, THE EXORCIST III was released to some decent success both critically and even financially. Based on William Peter Blatty’s sequel novel Legion, Blatty himself decided to adapt his novel into a screenplay. He also decided to direct the film himself to make sure his story was given the respect it deserved and be a truly serious sequel to the original unlike THE HERETIC.Even in 2023, THE EXORCIST III is still the only other film in the series [besides the first] to be given massive praise for its tone, approach to the narrative, and even the overall production. Despite the studio wanting Blatty’s ending to be more akin to the ending of the original EXORCIST [which he was against, creating the need of a Legion Cut that’s closer to the novel’s conclusion], THE EXORCIST III is still a super solid flick that ought to get more love and attention than it actually does.While there is still demonic activity and supernatural occurrences one would expect out of an EXORCIST movie, THE EXORCIST III is more in line with a crime procedural at times - sort of like SE7EN, FALLEN or even COPYCAT would do years later. The main narrative revolves around “The Gemini Killer”, a serial killer who is known to cut certain fingers or drain a victim’s blood as a trademark, along with desecrating religious statues by beheading them, painting them in blackface or adding sexual connotations that would disturb most people. The problem about all this is that it’s believed “The Gemini Killer” had been already found and executed for his crimes. And while at first this new series of murders seem like a copycat, this new killer is doing things the old “Gemini Killer” would do that only the police know about [the real modus operandi and trademarks were kept from the public].The detective investigating this is Lieutenant William F. Kinderman, a supporting character from the original EXORCIST who was investigating all the murders and strange activity happening around the McNeil household at the time. Along with his friend Father Dyer, another supporting character from the first film, they’re wondering if this may be the real "Gemini Killer" doing all these heinous things. It gets stranger as all clues lead them to a psychiatric hospital where Father Karras seems to be the main suspect - which shouldn’t be possible since Father Dyer found him dead on those infamous McNeil steps after he took in the demon that had possessed Regan and sacrificed himself by leaping out of a window to his supposed death. So when confronting Father Karras in his hospital room, he sometimes appears as himself and then as someone named James Venamun, who claims to be the real “Gemini Killer”. So what’s going on?This mystery really raises the creep factor of THE EXORCIST III, as we’re not sure what we’re really seeing or supposed to believe when it comes to “The Gemini Killer”. There’s obviously a possession going on with the same demon [Pazuzu] who had possessed both Regan and Karras. But is this man really Karras, or is he James Venamun? Is he both? Is he neither? Through Lt. Kinderman, who is a skeptic and doesn’t believe in any of the stories about demon possession and a previous exorcism, his slow belief about the supernatural is a great character arc and gets the audience invested to go along the ride with him as he starts to figure out the truth. The story of the storytelling and mystery is strengthened by personnel and patients at the psychiatric hospital, who all behave in strange ways for whatever reason, making you question if these people are all influenced by this evil or are just quirky as heck and are red herrings to throw off one’s scent. Everyone besides Kinderman and Dyer all seem like they’re hiding something from the Lieutenant, putting to question whether this is all really happening or something this evil presence is doing to confuse the detective along with the audience. Unlike the goofiness and overly ambitious script that plagued THE HERETIC, Blatty treats this whole scenario seriously - something that helped the original EXORCIST to achieve the status it did from all audiences [not just horror audiences]. We care about Kinderman and his investigation because he cares and doesn’t let anything strange or personal stop him from finding out the truth.While the theatrical cut and the Legion Cut are similar in many ways, the real differences are how “The Gemini Killer” is presented and the endings themselves. In the Legion Cut, we don’t even get Father Karras at all, with James Venamun being the only real antagonist. This actually cements the narrative as more realistic, as Venamun is just a “normal” man who may know more things about the serial killings than one ought to. Or maybe he’s possessed after all. Or just plain crazy. There’s something supernatural going on in the theatrical version, but the Legion Cut makes you question it a bit more until the end. As for the endings, The Legion Cut ends pretty abruptly with a single gunshot to wrap things up. The studio had issues with this because nothing in this version played up to the title of the film. In other words, where was the exorcism? So despite Blatty being against it, he took up the challenge to build up a more fantastical ending involving an underused priest, supernatural effects and a battle between good versus evil that connected itself back to THE EXORCIST. I know a lot of people prefer the simpler ending of the Legion Cut, but I feel the theatrical ending kicks things up a few notches and feels more satisfying to me as a whole. Kinderman finally believes in demonic possession, Father Karras gets redeemed a bit, and it truly feels the evil is gone for the time being. I can appreciate a more subtle approach for the original plan, but an EXORCIST movie should have some sort of exorcism in it. Both versions are worth your time, but I feel the theatrical version is a bit more exciting to watch due to the ending.William Peter Blatty is a great novelist, but he also makes for a very good director as well. His second and last directorial film [the first being the awesome 1980’s THE NINTH CONFIGURATION], Blatty is more subtle in his visual approach than William Friedkin or even John Boorman. Blatty’s style is more comparable to a 90s thriller - slow [but not dull], muted colors, and adding weird things in the background that make you focus on the entire shot rather than what is just happening in the foreground. I mean, there are people crawling on ceilings, morphing into multiple people and even that classic moment involving a nurse and a large pair of shears. And despite his arguments against filming it, I think the theatrical ending is shot pretty well for the most part. Honestly, THE EXORCIST III is more of an actor’s showcase where the characters are more important than the visuals. But Blatty does a good job and manages to direct a sequel that feels more connected to the first one than THE HERETIC ever did.The cast is very solid. George C. Scott is pretty great as Lt. Kinderman, playing a gruff skeptic who finally starts to believe he’s way over-his-head with a situation he has no idea how to deal with until the end. I love how quiet his performance is at the start of the film, but turns a bit more hammy and over-the-top towards the end. It’s wonderful. Ed Flanders is also great as Father Dyer, bringing in some humor to a serious movie. His chemistry with Scott is awesome and you truly believe these two have been friends for decades. Scott Wilson is solid as Dr. Temple. Jason Miller is very good as the returning Father Karras, struggling with what happened to him at the end of the first film. But Brad Dourif is the main reason to watch THE EXORCIST III, as he steals every scene as “The Gemini Killer” James Venamun. Dourif is just captivating and commanding through his subtle body language, maniacal facial expressions and the strong reciting of his dialogue. He’s given more to say and do in The Legion Cut, being the best part of that version as well. Just a fantastic performance in a great sequel.THE FINAL HOWLTHE EXORCIST III is probably one of the more underrated great horror sequels ever made. Subtly strong direction by William Peter Blatty, a captivating mystery mixed with some memorable scares and visuals, and fantastic performances - especially by George C. Scott, Jason Miller and especially Brad Dourif. While it’s not a masterpiece like the 1973 original, this 1990 sequel is definitely a massive improvement over 1977’s THE HERETIC: EXORCIST II in every single way, making this the first real sequel [in my opinion] of the franchise. While I prefer the Theatrical Cut due to its final act, The Legion Cut is no slouch and offers something to those wanting a more grounded resolution. Either way, this is a mandatory viewing for any fan of this franchise.SCORE3.5 Howls Outta 4(9 out of 10)

DOUBLE FEATURE: The Nun (2018) & The Nun II (2023)
DIRECTED BYCorin Hardy (THE NUN)Michael Chaves (THE NUN II)STARRINGTaissa Farmiga - Sister IreneJonas Bloquet - Maurice “Frenchie” TheriaultBonnie Aarons - The NunDemian Bichir - Father Burke (THE NUN)Ingrid Bisu - Sister Oana (THE NUN)Charlotte Hope - Sister Victoria (THE NUN)Storm Reid - Debra (THE NUN II)Anna Popplewell - Kate (THE NUN II)Katelyn Rose Downey - Sophie (THE NUN II)Genre - Horror/Supernatural/Demons/PossessionRunning Time - 96 Minutes (THE NUN)/110 Minutes (THE NUN II)PLOTTHE NUN - When a young nun at a cloistered abbey in Romania takes her own life, a priest with a haunted past (Demian Bichir) and a novitiate on the threshold of her final vows (Taissa Farmiga) are sent by the Vatican to investigate. Together they uncover the order’s unholy secret. Risking not only their lives but their faith and their very souls, they confront a malevolent force in the form of the same demonic nun (Bonnie Aarons) that first terrorized audiences in THE CONJURING 2 as the abbey becomes a horrific battleground between the living and the damned.THE NUN II - Four years after the events at the Abbey of St. Carta, Sister Irene returns once again and comes face to face with the demonic force Valak, the Nun.REVIEWAfter taking a much needed break from reviewing since April, I was planning on returning many times for films that were being released theatrically for the past few months. While there were a couple of gems out there [THE BLACKENING and TALK TO ME], the others just left me in a state of “meh”.THE BOOGEYMAN? Fine, but not motivating enough to discuss.INSIDIOUS: THE RED DOOR? Underwhelming return for the original cast that probably would have lowered my original score if I had written about it.THE HAUNTED MANSION? I forgot it even existed and so should you.THE LAST VOYAGE OF THE DEMETER? Hopefully for all our sakes.But I knew I had to return for something. And with 2023’s spooky season finally here, we got some big projects being released. SAW X? THE EXORCIST: BELIEVER? FIVE NIGHT AT FREDDY’S? There are films many of us will be discussing for the next couple of months.However things are starting early with THE NUN II, another spin-off of the popular and successful THE CONJURING franchise that not many people were all that excited about honestly. Despite watching all three CONJURING flicks [first two are aces, the third one is whatever], I have never sat down and watched any of the spin-offs. No ANNABELLE movies. Not THE NUN flicks. And I never bothered with THE CURSE OF LA LLORONA. But I’m an AMC A-List member and I figured I might as well use my subscription on this. But first, I had to watch the original NUN movie to understand this sequel.And man… 2018’s THE NUN is not a good movie. In fact, it’s so uneventful that I have already forgotten what I watched [besides the flashbacks and call backs in the sequel]. Audiences must have really loved the Nun character in THE CONJURING 2, which is the only explanation I can come up with when it comes to its good box office numbers. But I’m sure some wished they had never bothered after watching it.The good? THE NUN has a ton of atmosphere and mood that at least tries to give the movie a creepy vibe that the story and direction fail to do. So great Gothic cinematography boosts the first film, along with a solid cast that also elevates proceedings a bit. Bonnie Aarons is a wonderful presence as the evil Nun, while Taissa Farmiga and Demian Bichir do well with what they’re given as the two main protagonists. Jonas Bloquet is also okay, although his attempt as the comic relief doesn’t really work at all and feels forced.Other than that, THE NUN is a mess of a spin-off. Director Corin Hardy relies too much on jump scares - none of them work, by the way - making the film feel more annoying than scary. And the story is all over the place, to the point where it’s big ambition to do an INDIANA JONES and DA VINCI CODE type of narrative just takes you out of it and makes you not remember much at all once it’s over. Not only do you have an evil Nun, but you also have a demonic ghost child, the blood of Jesus Christ as a MacGuffin, and a young nun with visions that may or may not be doing more harm than good. The film honestly barely kept my interest despite all of this, mainly because none of these plot devices felt truly developed. THE CONJURING films work because they follow the slow burn, less-is-more approach. THE NUN tries too much and feels like an unnecessary cash in as a result.Because of my lack of feelings for THE NUN, I honestly wasn’t expecting much out of THE NUN II. But surprisingly, this is a sequel that actually manages to be a huge improvement over the first one in almost every single way. Hell, I liked THE NUN II more than some of the other recent films that I wrote about earlier.The producers of THE NUN must have realized that despite the money they made, the fan and critical response wasn’t great. And despite this sequel being a total cash grab and unnecessary, I have to actually admire everyone involved for fixing some of the issues and actually trying to make a decently watchable film that felt more focused and purposeful for the overall franchise. I’m not saying that THE NUN II is a masterpiece or even good, but I can respect producers who see the error of their ways to create a film even a hater like me could even enjoy for the most part.What helps this sequel is that THE NUN II has a tighter, more focused narrative that keeps things as simple as possible, despite it being pretty generic and cliche. There’s an actual course of action from beginning to end that makes sense, allowing characters old and new to develop into actual people we can somewhat care about and/or have a reaction to, despite a larger cast. Unlike the adventure and mystery style of the first film, THE NUN II is a more straightforward good versus evil, exorcism type of movie that we’ve all seen done multiple times before. And while we’ve already had films this year that have done this [THE POPE’S EXORCIST] and films yet to come [THE EXORCIST: BELIEVER], at least it’s a narrative I can easily understand and get into. Frenchie being possessed by the Nun’s evil gives the movie a reason for Sister Irene to seek him out and reconnect. His possession also justifies why he’s working at a Catholic school and seeking some ancient artifact for his possessor to gain ultimate power. These plot devices allow older characters to grow in a more interesting way that the previous film didn’t allow them to, while giving newer characters a reason to exist - even if most of them are just there to be victims of the evil that’s corrupting the school. Sister Irene’s new friendship and mentorship with nun-in-training Debra is given enough time to develop into something interesting enough that I wouldn’t mind it continuing if there’s another installment. Frenchie’s more serious character is a massive improvement and he becomes a well-written character because of it, especially through his relationships with a woman he previously had feelings for [Irene] and the teacher he falls for [Kate] fleshing him out and giving him a reason to fight against the evil possessing him. We even have a decent mystery and some bullish female characters that will probably elicit some sort of reaction from the audience.The direction by Michael Chaves, who also directed CONJURING spin-off THE CURSE OF LA LLORONA [which I’ve never bothered with] and THE CONJURING 3 [yuck], does a good job with THE NUN II. The film loses a lot of its atmosphere and mood from the first film unfortunately. But the tone and action is done a lot better here. There’s no unnecessary comedy getting in the way. The jump scares are kept to a minimum. The newsstand scene from the trailer is still effective within the context of the film [great scene]. And the film’s final act is pretty strong, especially when we have the Nun stalking people, a ton of explosions and a good looking Devil-Goat thing that terrorizes the school. Chaves doesn’t reinvent the wheel or anything like that, but I thought the film was visually more interesting than the first film.The actors are also pretty good here again. The returning actors [Farmiga and Blochet] are much stronger in the sequel, due to better writing for their characters and just an overall confidence boost from both of them. Blochet, in particular, is handled much better here than in the first as he’s given more meaty material to chew on. Bonnie Aarons is still wonderful as the evil Nun, maintaining the same level of malevolent presence she had in THE CONJURING 2. The only actor who felt a bit out-of-place is probably Storm Reid as the new nun-in-training Debra. She’s not terrible or anything [actually, she’s good in the role she’s given], but her character is written in such a modern way that her performance doesn’t fit the tone of a 1950s period piece. You get a bit used to it by the film’s end, but it’s definitely jarring for her first few scenes. THE FINAL HOWLEven though I had to sit through the bland and unimpressive THE NUN from 2018 in order to watch the current THE NUN II, I’m kind of glad I did since the sequel is a much better time than the first installment. THE NUN skates by with a great atmosphere and decent performances, but not much else. THE NUN II is an improvement in almost every way. Better performances, more care with the jump scares and a more interesting, if not generic, good versus evil exorcism movie that allows some depth to characters who didn’t have much before.In fact, I had more fun with THE NUN II than a majority of the big screen horror films I’ve watched this summer, which is surprising since I didn’t care about this sequel at all prior to viewing it. I don’t think any of THE NUN films are must-sees or anything, but it may be worth sitting through the dull first movie in order to get caught up with the much more watchable sequel. With the success of the new installment, we’ll probably see more about this character. But we don’t really need NUN of that, do we?SCORETHE NUN (2018)1.5 Howls Outta 4(4 out of 10)THE NUN II (2023)2.5 Howls Outta 4(6 out of 10)

Evil Dead Rise (2023)
DIRECTED BYLee CroninSTARRINGLily Sullivan - BethAlyssa Sutherland - EllieMorgan Davies - DannyGabrielle Echols - BridgetNell Fisher - CassieJayden Daniels - GabrielAnna-Maree Thomas - JessicaGenre - Horror/DemonsRunning Time - 97 MinutesPLOTTwo sisters find an ancient book that gives birth to bloodthirsty demons that run amok in a Los Angeles apartment building and thrusts them into a primal battle for survival as they face the most nightmarish version of family imaginable.REVIEWAfter ten years since a popular remake that was meant to relaunch a beloved franchise, we finally get a new EVIL DEAD movie in theaters. Ever since 1981, this cult horror franchise has been embraced warmly by the horror community through multiple films, several video games and even a television show that lasted for three seasons. Originally planned to be an HBO Max exclusive for 2022, the new owners of Warner Bros. Discovery decided it was worth releasing the series’ fifth installment, EVIL DEAD RISE, in theaters as a way to gain a profit by seeing how well it would perform at the box office. Considering the film has already made its budget back and just needs a few million to start building a profit for the studio, I say WBD made the right decision here. It’s also a good thing that EVIL DEAD RISE is a pretty good horror flick, despite that this installment may be the weakest of any EVIL DEAD film [and TV show] that has come before it.First off, I think having a different location for the Deadites was a great decision. It’s been proven that it can work outside of a woods and cabin setting, like the refreshing take in ARMY OF DARKNESS and even on the Ash vs. Evil Dead television show. Having the demons take over a high rise building in Los Angeles is definitely a step in the right direction if they plan on continuing the franchise [which will obviously happen due to EVIL DEAD RISE’s success]. While I do wish more was done inside of the entire building when it came to the terror, I thought enough of the location was used to create a level of claustrophobia. Having most of the events happen within a single apartment was cool, while the elevator and parking garage moments were effectively used to heighten things a bit.I also thought the characters were likable enough of the audience to get behind them, even if some of them do stupid things. I wish the characters had a bit more depth, but you get enough information about them to know who they are. Free-spirit Beth is hiding a pregnancy she hasn’t fully dealt with yet. Single mother Ellie who is trying to move on with her life, dealing with the abandonment of an ex-husband and having to raise three children while preparing a quick move out of the building. Bridget seems to be the oldest and environmentally friendly. Danny is a DJ and music lover who sees demonic books and reads them while playing records where the evil words of the Naturom Demonto are being read to unleash hell. Cassie is the youngest and seems to enjoy making weapons to protect herself. They’re a dysfunctional family who clearly love each other and get tested when Ellie becomes a Deadite. We also have neighbors who seem to have their own stories, but they’re never really focused on. Neighbor Gabriel seemed to have a thing for Ellie and vice-versa, but that never went anywhere really. I don’t think the film focuses on the relationships enough to feel their familial connection. But separately, the characters are enjoyable to watch on various levels.I think the only reason why the characters worked better than what the script probably meant was due to the performances. Everyone in the cast did a great job with what they were given. In particular, Lily Sullivan was a strong lead as Beth. Sullivan manages to balance toughness with vulnerability, convincingly playing a woman who will do anything to make sure her and her family survive while trying to figure out how to stop the Deadites from completely taking over the building. Of the younger cast, Nell Fisher probably left the biggest impression as Cassie. Being the youngest main actress, Fisher carried herself very well and probably had the time of her life stabbing people in self-defense and getting drenched in blood. Her character made some real dumb decisions that kind of annoyed me, but Fisher’s likability softened those feelings a bit.The star of the show though was, undoubtedly, Alyssa Sutherland as Ellie. Sutherland’s solid as a struggling single mother and sister who is trying to move on with her life for the sake of her children. But when she becomes the lead Deadite for the rest of the movie, Sutherland’s performance is borderline creepy and darkly comedic at the same time. She also changes up her body movements, transforming her character from human to this alien being that has no issue causing havoc for her host’s family. I hope to see Sutherland do more projects in the future because she really stepped up and elevated EVIL DEAD RISE for me.I also enjoyed the homages and easter eggs that the film provided to fans of the franchise and to fans of the genre. We have references to previous EVIL DEAD films, like the mention of swallowing souls, reciting “Dead by Dawn” and even the eyeball gag into someone’s mouth like in EVIL DEAD II. Plus, we get the classic chainsaw making an appearance.There are also tributes for other horror films. The peep hole stuff reminded me of classic Dario Argento, especially 1986’s OPERA. We get blood pouring out of an elevator like 1980’s THE SHINING. And the final boss seems to be inspired by 1982’s THE THING. It’s obvious Lee Cronin is a horror film fan and I felt a lot of these callbacks felt more inspired than fan service.The gore and effects were also very good. A mix of both practical effects and CGI, they looked pretty impressive considering the movie had a $15 million budget. The Deadites looked great. The blood looked convincing. While the film could have been a bit edgier like the 2013 reboot/remake, some of the violent moments were cringe worthy in the best way. That cheese grater moment in particular - *shivers*.The direction by Lee Cronin is super solid, as he understood the assignment and managed to connect EVIL DEAD RISE to the rest of the franchise while maintaining its own identity. I thought there was a lot of style in terms of shots and I felt what was used when it came to the building was done really well. I liked that the Raimi sweeping shots for the Deadites were retained and that the gruesome moments weren’t shied away. I think Cronin could have possibly pushed things further and actually made the movie scarier than it actually was. But the film was shot well and Cronin managed to keep the essence of the franchise intact.There are issues with EVIL DEAD RISE though. While I understood the need for the pregnancy angle as a plot device to make Beth more maternal as the film progressed, it doesn’t really add much to the movie by its end. I think the character could have still hit similar beats without it, considering she cared about her sister’s children prior to the Deadites appearing.I also thought some of the characters really did some dumb things that frustrated and annoyed me. I get that it’s a horror trope and that’s how things move forward in these films. But as I get older, the more my eyes roll at some of these characters’ antics. Even at a young age, I was never that naive at the presence of danger.Despite a cool prologue and some awesome title cards, I thought the last few minutes felt oddly placed within the structure of the film. I get why it’s there as a way to explain what we saw first and how this will probably lead to more installments. But it fell kind of flat for me, especially that jump scare at the end. And like I mentioned earlier, the film doesn’t really push the envelope enough and feels the tamest and safest of the EVIL DEAD films. I was expecting something more violent and gorier and it just played out like your standard horror flick. What we get is great, but the other EVIL DEAD movies stand out due to the insane amount of blood, Deadite action and energy when it comes to the hero against the Deadites. When the energy does pop off, I feel it’s a bit late getting there and there’s not much time devoted to it. I just feel EVIL DEAD RISE doesn’t take enough chances.THE FINAL HOWLAlthough it’s my least favorite entry in this franchise, EVIL DEAD RISE is still a solid addition to the EVIL DEAD series. Director Lee Cronin understood the assignment, including things that fans of the franchise would expect or enjoy, while still keeping this installment as its own thing apart from the rest. Having the events started by the Naturom Demonto take place inside a high-rise building within an urban environment is a great fresh take for the series, even though I think more could have been done with the location. Same goes for the characters, who while likable, could have used a bit more depth and aren’t as memorable as Ash or Mia before them. But the cast is wonderful, especially Lily Sullivan as heroine Beth and Alyssa Sutherland as one of the more memorable Deadites in the franchise in Ellie. While I wish this installment had pushed the envelope more in some aspects, it’s still a fun movie and a worthy entry in the world of EVIL DEAD. Let’s see where they go with things in the next one, if that box office is any indication.SCORE3 Howls Outta 4(8 out of 10)

The Pope's Exorcist (2023)
DIRECTED BYJulius AverySTARRINGRussell Crowe - Father Gabriele AmorthDaniel Zovatto - Father EsquibelAlex Essoe - JuliaFranco Nero - The PopeLaurel Marsden - AmyPeter DeSouza-Feighoney - HenryGenre: Horror/Mystery/Thriller/Possession/DemonsRunning Time: 103 MinutesPLOTBased on true stories. Father Gabriele Amorth, Chief Exorcist of the Vatican, investigates a young boy’s terrifying possession and ends up uncovering a centuries-old conspiracy the Vatican has desperately tried to keep hidden.REVIEWIf you watched the trailer to THE POPE’S EXORCIST and thought that you’ve seen this film time and time before, you would be correct as this 2023 movie is as generic as they come where it concerns possession films. All the tropes are there - an innocent child getting possessed by a demon, the family taking the possessed victim to doctors to realize it’s not a medical issue, two priests with flaws trying to vanquish this demon to save the child and protect the victim’s family, and even a priest begging the demon to possess them in order to save the child. I swore I’ve seen this movie before. Did Sony really try to upstage David Gordon Green’s THE EXORCIST reboot/sequel before its release this October? Sneaky sneaky, Sony.Seriously, THE POPE’S EXORCIST could and probably should have gone straight to streaming since it doesn’t really add anything new to this type of horror sub-genre, especially when a more hyped film with a similar theme is coming out later in the year. The only reason it didn’t is because of Oscar winner Russell Crowe, who is the best part of this movie with an entertaining performance as the title character. The actor is clearly having fun playing a priest who gets to face off against demons [both physical and personal], performing all the tropes with a smile on his face and a wink to the audience. He gets to speak multiple languages. He gets to play both good and evil. Crowe could have really coasted with THE POPE’S EXORCIST, but he totally has his heart in the role and he elevates a by-the-numbers horror film into something more watchable than it deserves.And even though the film is obviously about good triumphing over evil through faith and love in God, I appreciated that THE POPE’S EXORCIST criticizes some aspects of the Church at certain points. Superiors want to eliminate the process of exorcisms, feeling they’re old hat. But Father Gabriele questions that if they do that, what’s the point of spreading the word of good against evil? Also, the two lead priests have things in their past that affect their progress during the exorcism, giving us a look that even these so-called “saints” struggle and succumb to sin just like the rest of us. It’s refreshing to see a movie that’s focused on religion and faith being this powerful thing to let in some negativity on the Church and some of the people that work for it. So the film gets points for that.Unfortunately, since the film is mainly focused on Father Gabriele and Father Esquibel, the story doesn’t allow the audience to really know the family of the possessed child. Other than the fact that the family is dealing with grief over the death of their husband/father and are in Spain to sell inherited property [that just happens to have been part of the Spanish Inquisition], not much is really known about them. Unlike the McNeils in THE EXORCIST, The Montellis in AMITYVILLE II: THE POSSESSION, or even Emily Rose in THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE, the audience has no real attachment to the victims. That takes away tension and suspense because I honestly didn’t care what would happen, while at the same time knowing that good would triumph because that’s what these films tell us. It’s a shame because their performances were pretty good, especially Alex Essoe as the mother and Peter DeSouza-Feighoney as the young possessed boy, Henry. But I’ve seen these similar roles performed better in other films, and that’s due to the script.The direction by Julius Avery is fine, but nothing memorable. If you’ve seen other possession horror films, you know what you’re getting here. There’s nothing new in terms of style or presentation. Tension and suspense isn’t really there. Jump scares don’t really work, at least not on me. The CGI gets pretty heavy during the final act and that’s actually used quite well for the most part. But to be honest with you, I watched THE POPE’S EXORCIST two days ago and I barely remember anything that stuck out from the visual presentation. Pretty on-the-nose stuff here.THE FINAL HOWLA pretty generic exorcism movie, THE POPE’S EXORCIST only really manages to stand out due to a fun Russell Crowe performance as the title character. While the rest of the cast are decent, Crowe steals the show in every scene he’s in and truly seems to be enjoying himself since he knows what type of movie he’s acting in and embraces it. The film is also elevated by a not-so black and white look at the Church, the flawed priests and the superiors’ stance on exorcisms back in the day that makes one question if they believed evil could possess good people or not. Other than that, every trope you need in an exorcism story is here and you won’t be surprised by the lack of suspense, tension and scares because you know exactly where things are going. Even the visual presentation by Julius Avery is by-the-numbers, despite a good use of CGI in the film’s final act. THE POPE’S EXORCIST is watchable fluff not worth getting possessed over.SCORE2 Howls Outta 4(6 out of 10)


1 2