Monthly Archives: February 2026

Aatank (1996): When Bollywood Heard the DUN-DUN

08 Sunday Feb 2026

Posted by in retrospective

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

By 1996, Jaws had long since escaped the confines of New Hollywood and become a migratory genre organism, washing up on shores far beyond Amity Island. Aatank, directed by Prem Lalwani, is one of the more fascinating examples of this cinematic drift—an Indian coastal thriller that doesn’t merely borrow Spielberg’s template, but absorbs it wholesale, then filters it through the melodramatic, musical, and moral frameworks of Bollywood cinema.

The influence is impossible to miss. A man-eating shark terrorises a fishing community. Authority figures falter. Economic greed disturbs the natural order. Loved ones vanish beneath deceptively calm waters. Lalwani stages his set-pieces with a clear awareness of Jaws’ grammar: delayed revelation, ominous underwater POVs, and a mounting sense that the sea itself has turned hostile. Even the shark—“gigantic” and virtually indestructible—feels less like an animal than a force of narrative punishment.

Where Aatank diverges is in its cultural emphasis. Spielberg’s film is a parable about civic denial and institutional paralysis; Lalwani’s is rooted in class struggle, corruption, and exploitation. Alphonso, the gangster figure disturbing the ocean for black pearls, is as much the villain as the shark itself. The monster becomes an extension of human greed—a folkloric retribution rather than a random act of nature. This moral framing aligns Aatank more closely with Bollywood’s tradition of cosmic justice than Hollywood’s man-vs-nature spectacle.

Tonally, the film oscillates between romance, tragedy, and creature feature with little concern for restraint. Musical interludes and heightened emotion sit uneasily beside severed limbs and marine terror, yet this collision is precisely what makes Aatank compelling as a global genre artefact. It is not subtle, nor especially polished, but it is sincere in its ambition to localise a Western horror touchstone within Indian popular cinema.

The Prognosis:

Aatank stands as a reminder that Jaws did not merely create a subgenre—it became a cinematic language spoken worldwide, even when the accent was unmistakably regional. Rough around the edges and deeply derivative, yes, but also culturally revealing, Aatank is less a knock-off than a translation—one where the shark swims through distinctly Indian waters.

  • Saul Muerte

Pulse (2001) – 25 Years of Digital Despair

02 Monday Feb 2026

Posted by in retrospective

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

Kiyoshi Kurosawa’s 回路 (Kairo), released in 2001, arrived not as a conventional ghost story but as a premonition: a slow, suffocating meditation on isolation, technology, and the quiet extinction of human connection. Watching it again twenty-five years later, it remains both eerily prophetic and achingly nostalgic — a film that understood the emotional cost of the digital age before most of us had logged on.

Set in a Tokyo where computers begin opening doors to the afterlife, Pulse frames technology not as a tool but as a conduit for despair. The ghosts here are not vengeful spirits in the traditional sense; they are residues of loneliness, beings who have discovered that even death offers no companionship. Kurosawa’s great insight is that horror does not arrive through violence or spectacle, but through absence — empty rooms, abandoned factories, and human figures slowly fading into smudges on the wall.

This is a film that weaponises space. Corridors stretch too long. Rooms feel cavernous and airless. Characters drift through environments that seem already evacuated of meaning. Kurosawa’s camera rarely rushes. Instead, it waits, allowing dread to ferment in stillness. Few images in early-2000s horror are as indelible as the woman approaching in the factory corridor — a sequence that reduces movement itself to a source of existential terror.

At the time of release, Pulse was often grouped with the J-horror wave that brought Ringu and Ju-on to international attention. Yet Kurosawa’s sensibility was markedly different. Where those films leaned on mythic curses and narrative propulsion, Pulse dissolves plot into atmosphere. It is less concerned with why the ghosts appear than with what their presence reveals about the living.

The film’s central anxiety — that technology would not connect us, but isolate us further — now plays less like science fiction and more like quiet sociology. Kurosawa’s vision of a world where people retreat into screens, lose the ability to touch one another, and eventually vanish altogether, feels uncannily aligned with the psychic landscape of the 2020s. Social media, remote work, algorithmic loneliness: Pulse anticipated them not in mechanics, but in mood.

And yet, there is a tenderness to its pessimism. The film does not rage against modernity; it mourns it. Its characters are not punished for their solitude — they are already wounded by it. Even the apocalypse that unfolds feels less like an invasion than a surrender.

Revisiting Pulse now, one feels both chilled and comforted by its slowness. In an era of accelerated horror and algorithm-driven scares, Kurosawa’s patient, analogue dread feels like a relic from a more contemplative age of genre cinema. The film’s grainy textures, dial-up modems, and empty chat rooms anchor it firmly in the early 2000s, lending it a melancholic nostalgia alongside its enduring relevance.

The Prognosis:

Twenty-five years on, Pulse remains one of the most philosophically unsettling horror films ever made — a ghost story not about death, but about what it means to disappear while still alive.

A rare work that has aged not by becoming obsolete, but by becoming increasingly true.

  • Saul Muerte

Five years ago, to mark the film’s twentieth anniversary, the Surgeons of Horror team recorded a special in-depth podcast discussion on Pulse, exploring its themes of isolation, technology, and existential dread in the context of both early-2000s J-horror and the modern digital age. It remains a thoughtful companion piece to Kurosawa’s film — a conversation that deepens appreciation for a work that continues to haunt long after the final frame fades to black.

Hearts, Masks, and Missed Opportunities: Why Valentine Failed the Slasher Revival

01 Sunday Feb 2026

Posted by in retrospective

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

By the time Valentine arrived in early 2001, the slasher revival ignited by Scream was already beginning to show signs of exhaustion. What had once felt like a sharp meta-correction to a moribund genre was fast becoming a formula in its own right, and Jamie Blanks’ glossy, well-cast but timid thriller stands as one of the cycle’s clearest examples of diminishing returns.

On paper, the ingredients are sound. A high-school humiliation echoes forward into adulthood. A masked avenger marks his victims with sentimental cruelty. A quartet of recognisable young stars — Denise Richards, David Boreanaz, Marley Shelton, Jessica Capshaw — circle one another in a web of suspicion and romantic misdirection. Even Blanks himself, coming off the more stylish Urban Legend, seems an ideal candidate to steer a post-Scream whodunit into the new millennium.

Yet Valentine is a film curiously afraid of its own moment.

Where Scream and even I Know What You Did Last Summer attempted — however commercially — to interrogate genre mechanics, Valentine retreats. Instead of advancing the slasher into the 2000s, it slides backwards into mid-90s complacency, borrowing the superficial trappings of postmodern horror while abandoning the intelligence that made the revival briefly compelling. Its mystery is serviceable but inert, its twists telegraphed, its structure overly reliant on red herrings that never generate true paranoia.

The central conceit — that cruelty in adolescence metastasises into murderous adulthood — should provide psychological bite. Instead, the film reduces trauma to a blunt narrative engine, less interested in emotional consequence than in ticking off victims one by one. The killer’s motivation is comprehensible but thin, treated as an excuse for mechanics rather than an exploration of obsession or grievance.

Blanks directs with polish but little personality. The camera glides, the lighting flatters, the murders are bloodless enough to appease ratings boards — and in doing so, drain the film of impact. Even the Valentine’s Day setting, rich with symbolic potential, becomes mere decoration: hearts, cards, masks, all deployed without irony or thematic weight.

What lingers is not terror, but missed opportunity.

The cast, to their credit, does what it can. Shelton brings a quiet steadiness, Richards an icy defensiveness, Boreanaz the requisite brooding ambiguity. Yet the screenplay affords none of them enough interiority to transcend archetype. They are suspects first, characters second.

The Prognosis:

Valentine plays less like a product of horror’s rebirth than a sign of its impending fatigue. It mistakes imitation for evolution, reverence for innovation. Where the genre should have been pushing forward — into new forms, new anxieties, new structures — Valentine clings to the safety of familiar rhythms and well-worn shocks.

Not incompetent. Not irredeemable. But emblematic.

A film that wanted to ride the coattails of Scream, and instead found itself stranded between decades — too self-aware for the 90s, too conservative for the 2000s, and ultimately too cautious to leave a lasting scar.

  • Saul Muerte

Lord of Misrule (2025) and the Beautiful Trap of Folk Horror

01 Sunday Feb 2026

Posted by in Movie review

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Harvest festivals have often provided a sense of eternal dread in horror cinema. They promise abundance, fertility, renewal — and yet so often conceal rot beneath the ribbons. Lord of Misrule arrives knowingly into that lineage, stepping barefoot into the blood-soaked soil cultivated by The Wicker Man, The Witch, Midsommar, and their increasingly crowded offspring. It is a film deeply aware of the terrain it treads, and for much of its runtime, that awareness works in its favour.

Set within a secluded village bound by tradition and silence, the film opens with a familiar yet potent inciting wound: the disappearance of the daughter of the town’s new priest during the annual harvest festival. From that absence, Lord of Misrule builds a creeping architecture of dread — one not reliant on jump scares or grotesquerie, but on the slow realisation that this town does not merely remember its past… it still feeds it.

Folk Horror with its Roots Intact

What distinguishes Lord of Misrule from lesser folk horror pastiches is its patience. The film allows itself to breathe within the rhythms of rural life — the rituals, the half-smiles, the whispered warnings that feel less like exposition than confession. There is a welcome refusal to rush headlong into spectacle; instead, dread accumulates in glances, silences, and the heavy implication that something ancient still demands tribute.

The concept itself is elegantly simple: a malevolent spirit bound to the land, sustained through sacrifice, disguised beneath centuries of polite ceremony. It is horror not as invasion, but as inheritance — evil not arriving from without, but preserved lovingly from within. This thematic alignment with generational guilt and communal complicity places Lord of Misrule firmly within folk horror’s most enduring philosophical concerns.

Anchored by Flesh and Bone

Central to the film’s effectiveness are its performances, which elevate the material beyond mere genre exercise.

Tuppence Middleton delivers a measured, emotionally grounded performance that anchors the film’s more ethereal elements. She brings a quiet steel to her role — grief without hysteria, resolve without bombast — allowing the horror to orbit her rather than overwhelm her. She becomes the audience’s surrogate not through fear, but through endurance.

Ralph Ineson, meanwhile, is perfectly cast. His voice alone seems carved from oak and grave soil, and he carries the weight of rural menace with effortless authority. Ineson understands folk horror instinctively: his presence suggests not villainy, but inevitability — as though the land itself has learned how to speak through him.

Together, Middleton and Ineson provide the film with its most compelling dynamic: modern skepticism locked in slow collision with ritualistic fatalism.

When the Earth Cracks

Yet for all its atmospheric command, Lord of Misrule ultimately stumbles where folk horror so often does — in its final act.

After spending so long carefully cultivating ambiguity, dread, and moral tension, the film opts for a more conventional and hurried resolution. The climax, rather than deepening the film’s thematic unease, simplifies it. What was once uncanny becomes explicit; what was once philosophical becomes procedural. The film trades unease for explanation, dread for closure — and in doing so, loses some of the strange power it so patiently summoned.

This is not a disastrous collapse, but it is a deflating one. The third act feels less like a natural culmination than a narrative obligation — as though the film, having wandered confidently into ancient woods, suddenly remembered it had to find its way back out.

A Worthy Addition to the Circle

Still, to dwell solely on its shortcomings would be to ignore what Lord of Misrule accomplishes with confidence and restraint. In an era where folk horror has become increasingly stylised and self-conscious, the film remains refreshingly earnest. It is not ironic. It is not detached. It believes in its mythology — and that belief carries it far, even when its footing falters.

Lord of Misrule stands as a strong, if imperfect, addition to contemporary folk horror. It may not redefine the genre, but it respects it deeply — and in a landscape crowded with hollow ritual and empty symbolism, that alone makes it worth entering the circle.

  • Saul Muerte

LORD OF MISRULE will be available to Rent or buy on Digital at: Apple TV, Prime Video, Google TV, YouTube, Fetch (AU), Foxtel Store (AU), SKY Store (NZ), and Neon (NZ). Own it on DVD at JB Hi-Fi and Sanity from FEBRUARY 4TH!