M3GAN

-------------------------------------------------------------------

In case you haven’t seen the intro from my entry dated 1/26/19 (it’s in my archives whenever you want to read it), I’m no longer going to review every single movie I see.  I’m going to review one, with the occasional bonus, and just give ratings for the rest from now on (unless I decide to pick it up again in the future).  You can always ask me why I gave the ratings for the films without reviews though (via comments or the e-mail addresses under the ‘About Me’ section).

-------------------------------------------------------------------

M3GAN                                                                       OK/G

It received a rating of 93% (as of this writing) out of roughly 300 critics on Rotten Tomatoes, there were memes created, and a sequel is already planned.  Surely there must be something special about this killer doll film, no?  I watched both the rated and unrated versions (both currently available on Peacock), and I usually like to watch the rated version first (if given the option since that’s what the general population is initially given).  There are only a few scenes (you can count them on one hand) that are a bit gorier in the unrated one, but there may have also been a few more “F” bombs, if I’m not mistaken.  In other words, go for the unrated version if you prefer your films a tad more violent.  [Sometimes an unrated version is completely different, such as Dead Alive, that zombie movie Peter Jackson did before The Lord of the Rings films, which was much, much gorier than the rated version, which I saw first].  The titular creation (the spelling is an acronym) comes about when a woman is forced to care for her niece and thereafter given an idea for a plaything (that being a 4-foot doll with sentient qualities).  As with all technology in entertainment that seems too good to be true, eventually bad things happen.  Do you think Megan goes after the ignorant neighbor and her aggressive dog, plus the bully of the little girl she’s created to protect?  Of course she does; it’s just a matter of how and when.  Although this is marketed as a killer doll flick, it’s more of a killer robot flick.  Whatever, it involves an item that kills.  Was it overrated?  Possibly, but not necessarily.  I enjoyed it, a little, for being nothing more than what it set out to be, but I don’t think it was anything super, super special.  2/25/2023

Bonus reviews:

From (Season One)

Ten-episode series on MGM+ (which I believe is the new Paramount+), all roughly 50-minutes each.  There’s a small town surrounded by woods wherein anyone who happens to enter it cannot leave (you try and you’ll just end up right back in town).  People stuck there have come from all over.  There are creatures that look like people until they attack that only come out at night.  Are they vampires?  Possibly; I don’t recall the name ever mentioned; they’re just labeled “monsters.”  You must be inside somewhere protected by a talisman that prevents them from entering.  Are these people in some kind of purgatory?  Like all of life’s questions, everyone in town has speculations.  There is a Stephen King quality to it all in that there are many characters we get to know that are stuck in a predicament.  It does drag at times (no surprise given there are ten episodes not much shorter than an hour a piece), but I never felt like I forced myself to continue, and I am curious as to what the big mystery is, which wasn’t revealed this season.  There is a season two coming this April, and I will tune in for at least one more round (two at the absolute most), but I hope they don’t plan on going longer than that.  2/22/2023

Sorority Babes in the Slimeball Bowl-O-Rama 2        EH

This is actually a sequel (released at the end of last year) to the 1988 film, as it refers to the events in it (providing a brief flashback), but I think it’s more of a remake.  Was it unnecessary?  Hell, to those that actually saw it, was the first movie even necessary?  [I know, are any movies really necessary?  All you do is sit on your ass.  On a side note---Static-X used a quote from the film on one of their Wisconsin Death Trip tracks].  With a title like that (I’m referring to the first here), I don’t think you’re supposed to take it seriously.  It (the predecessor) was slightly (I stress the word slightly) fun in that cheesy Eighties horror-comedy way, it involving babes in a sorority (no way, really?) initiating other babes, horny dudes that get caught spying on these babes, and the initiated babes forced to break into a bowling alley (again, really?) with these busted dudes to steal a trophy.  The trophy they happen to steal contains an imp that grants them all wishes, but, in the age-old ‘be careful what you wish for’ scenario, these wishes end up doing more harm than good (what do you expect from a demon?).  That imp is what I found most irking about the film despite being practical---he didn’t belong in a movie that should’ve been cheesy Eighties fun.  I think I would’ve enjoyed it more had the sorority babes and the horny dudes simply break into the bowling alley and just bowl in addition to doing typical cheesy Eighties movie stuff.  It was directed by David DeCoteau (a filmmaker with a slew of less-than-B-movies to his name) and featured recognizable B-movie actresses Linnea Quigley (Silent Night, Deadly Night; The Return of the Living Dead; Night of the Demons) and Brinke Stevens (The Slumber Party Massacre), the latter directing this sequel and making an appearance as her character from the first (I met her at my first horror convention years ago; nice lady).  This sequel follows the exact same formula with different performers (one being another recognizable face from Eighties films), a different bowling alley, and a slightly different imp (albeit with a similar persona---you’ll find out why); different sorority house too probably (hence why I say it’s more of a remake).  I think the only people that will watch this are those that have seen the first one and will do so out of curiosity (yours truly certainly was curious, especially for a sequel to a film like that made 34 years later!).  It is barely even an hour, but, if anything, I would just tell you to waste roughly 20 extra minutes with the predecessor, even though I would suggest spending your time with even better films than that.  2/19/2023

Other movies I've seen and their ratings (see above):

Boiling Point (2021)  >>>OK

The Fabelmans  >>>OK

#Float  >>>EH

House of Darkness (2016)  >>>EH

The Retaliators  >>>OK/G

The Strays  >>>OK/G

            (Netflix)

The Visitor (2022)  >>>EH/OK

---Sean O.

2/26/2023

Bones and All/Deadstream

-------------------------------------------------------------------

In case you haven’t seen the intro from my entry dated 1/26/19 (it’s in my archives whenever you want to read it), I’m no longer going to review every single movie I see.  I’m going to review one, with the occasional bonus, and just give ratings for the rest from now on (unless I decide to pick it up again in the future).  You can always ask me why I gave the ratings for the films without reviews though (via comments or the e-mail addresses under the ‘About Me’ section).

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Bones and All                                                              G

A cannibal romance.  Perfect for Valentine’s Day, no?  Will romance fans enjoy it?  Hard to tell, but the cannibal scenes (and there are some) aren’t too disturbing (says I) and aren’t lingered on too long.  Will horror fans be turned off by the romance?  Not necessarily.  Hell, Shaun of the Dead is a romantic comedy with zombies and was fully embraced by the horror community (I’m a fan even though it is a bit overrated).  Horror fans are typically more open-minded as long as there are horror, or just horrific, elements.  This is a coming-of-age romance with cannibals, the cannibal aspect making it a bit more unique than other coming-of-age romances (obviously).  In this film, they are labeled “eaters” and apparently have the ability to smell other eaters.  Whereas cannibals in other films seemingly do it by choice, these cannibals (excuse me, eaters) appear to do it innately, possibly through genetics, even feeling bad after certain instances.  It’s never disclosed as to why they need to do it, they just do (they also eat regular food too).  They can’t stay in one place after they eat, therefore this is also a road movie (never staying in one setting for too long).  It does feel a tad lengthy towards the end at a little over 2 hours, but it’s generally a compelling take on the cannibal subgenre.  Yes, it’s ultimately a cannibal film, being the common theme, which, again, makes it a more unique coming-of-age romance since they don’t often contain dark subject matter.  [The director, Luca Guadagnino, also helmed Call Me by Your Name and the awful Suspiria remake, so perhaps romance and horror are his specialties?  You can check out my review for the former, which also stars Timothée Chalamet, in here---https://vampireclown82.blogspot.com/2018/03/mooby-reviews-31818.html; the latter I just gave an EH rating].  Happy Valentine’s Day!  2/12/2023

Deadstream                                                                 OK/G

Found footage movies are dead.  Aside from the Paranormal Activity films, the majority of them were kind of old after The Blair Witch Project (a film I hated initially, but grew to at least appreciate), which is said to have started the trend (even though Cannibal Holocaust is said to have inspired that; in style only, obviously).  Naturally, with any genre/subgenre, there are always going to be exceptions.  This is actually one of them.  Available on Shudder/AMC+, it involves a dude trying to win back fans for his livestreaming (get the title?) series after an incident by visiting a haunted house in Utah.  It’s kind of a meta-found footage film as it calls attention to many of the tropes.  At first I thought I was watching a parody (a subgenre that’s always kind of been dead to me), but it gradually does get a bit serious (Need I say ‘obviously’ or ‘of course it does?’  Doesn’t it always get a bit serious when ghosts/haunted settings are involved in found footage?).  Serious in the horror-comedy sense, which this film most definitely is, it often being a hybrid genre that doesn’t always work.  This does manage to pull it off, for the most part---I actually did laugh out loud more than once, and, I don’t care what anyone says, but, found footage or not, seemingly empty houses at night, be they abandoned or not, are always going to be inherently creepy.  Sure, there may be clichés and predictable moments (need I say ‘obviously’ or ‘of course there are’ in a 2022 release?), but I generally had some fun with this.  2/11/2023

Bonus review:

In Search of Darkness:  Part III                                  OK/G

The third and allegedly final (as it’s labeled The Final Journey Into ‘80s Horror) film in this documentary trilogy covering Eighties horror.  [You can read my review of the first film in here---https://vampireclown82.blogspot.com/2020/08/three-horror-documentaries.html, and the second film in here--- https://vampireclown82.blogspot.com/2021/05/creepshow-season-2in-search-of-darkness.html].  I watched this in segments being that it’s roughly 340-minutes, and I’d like to meet someone that actually sat through the entire feature in one sitting without taking at least one break!  I don’t see a need to explain what it entails (you can check out my other two reviews above for descriptions), but basically films are picked from each year in the 1980’s and discussed by celebrities, both esoteric and exoteric (there’s also about 20 minutes worth of everyday fans discussing their love of the decade and genre during the end credits).  I’m just curious as to why and how the specific films were picked each time (Was there a voting process?  Were titles picked out of a hat?).  I have seen the majority of films picked all three times, but there have been some I haven’t (yeah, if you can believe it, I actually haven’t seen every single movie out there, nor do I desire to).  It seems there were more titles this round I haven’t seen though, and the majority of them I don’t care to after seeing them discussed.  Those were really the only times I was bored, but there were also instances my mind wandered when too much time was spent on films I have seen.  Still, I like the format of this doc trilogy and wouldn’t mind ones covering 70’s and 90’s horror, as I mentioned in my review of Part II.  Plus, it’s always fun conversing about movies, even if you watch other people do it.  2/6/2023

Other movies I've seen and their ratings (see above):

Attachment  >>>OK

   (In Danish and English with subtitles)

The Friendship Game  >>>B

Saloum  >>>OK

   (In French and Wolof with subtitles)

Sorry About the Demon  >>>OK

            (Shudder/AMC+)

---Sean O.

2/13/2023

Skinamarink

-------------------------------------------------------------------

In case you haven’t seen the intro from my entry dated 1/26/19 (it’s in my archives whenever you want to read it), I’m no longer going to review every single movie I see.  I’m going to review one, with the occasional bonus, and just give ratings for the rest from now on (unless I decide to pick it up again in the future).  You can always ask me why I gave the ratings for the films without reviews though (via comments or the e-mail addresses under the ‘About Me’ section).

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Skinamarink                                                                EH/OK

I didn’t watch any trailers beforehand; just saw images and what others (particularly horror fans) have said and those alone made me want to see it.  Turned out images are all you need to see anyhow to get a gist of what to expect.  All it primarily entails is lowly-lit interior shots of a house at night and what’s contained within.  It takes place in 1995 and there are two young kids, a boy and a girl (their parents appear, disappear, and reappear randomly like other items).  You catch glimpses of them, see their legs walking and such, and you hear them talking, but never get to know them on an intimate level.  A traditional narrative this is not.  It is as arty as arty gets.  Put it this way, if you don’t like the style within the first five minutes, I don’t think you’ll want to continue since it doesn’t change during the entire 100-minutes; it does get more and more bizarre though.  This is a classic example of a film that’s “not for everyone.”  Someone labeled it as akin to “Home Alone in Hell,”  which makes it sound cooler than it is, but I could sort of see the description---there are two kids seemingly home alone, there being no burglars, but there is some type of presence in this abode with them.  Someone else described it as if David Lynch directed Poltergeist, and I get that too, but this is even more experimental than the average Lynch project (at least we get to know the characters more intimately in his works).  I ultimately had a like-hate relationship with it.  It did have a strange way of making me want to continue (as any “innovative” feature likely would) and there are some eerie moments, and it didn’t really seem like 100-minutes when finished, but style obviously trumps substance and experimentation can only go so far.  There is substance buried within though.  I’d be curious to see the same movie presented in a typical narrative form, one, to see how much different it would be, and, two, to see which version is more effective.  2/5/2023

Bonus review:

Goodnight Mommy                                                     EH/OK

The original Austrian film was released just 8 years ago.  I rated it OK, according to my archives, and I probably would’ve given it the same rating after I re-watched it before checking out this remake released last year on Amazon Prime.  In the original, young twin boys have a strange suspicion their mother, whom they are staying with at an isolated house in the country, isn’t their real mother due to her behavior and bandages she’s wearing over her face after surgery.  The twist isn’t hard to figure out from the get-go, at least for me since I’ve seen too many movies.  It’s still an okay film (as I mentioned), albeit a bit of a slow burn, with an ending that may be ambiguous to some (the very ending, not the aforementioned twist).  This remake is not much different save for one or two scenes that are part of a dream (I don’t count that).  Even if I never saw the original, I think I would’ve still figured out the twist (it may have been even more obvious here).  Can I add this to the list of unnecessary remakes?  Sure.  I don’t see why you would watch this if you saw the original, especially not long beforehand, unless you want to see different performers, don’t want to read subtitles (if English is your primary language), or are just curious to see if anything will be altered (yours truly fell into the latter camp, in addition to OCD).  Everything happens exactly how you expect, right up to the ending that may be ambiguous for some.  I think I’m being a bit nice by giving it half an OK rating (I definitely lean more towards EH), but I actually didn’t completely dislike it even though no curveballs were thrown.  If you haven’t seen many movies in your lifetime, or never saw the original, you might like it better and possibly be shocked by the twist.  2/3/2023

Other movies and TV show(s) I’ve seen and their ratings (see above):

The Banshees of Inisherin  >>>OK/G

The Menu  >>>OK

Shady Grove  >>>OK

Strays (1991)  >>>EH/OK

Tár  >>>B

Three Pines (Season One)  >>>OK

   (Amazon Prime; 8 episodes)

The Uncanny (1977)  >>>OK

---Sean O.

2/6/2023