A “Five Nights at Freddy’s” or “FNAF” (as the fans know it) movie has hit cinema and digital screens (getting a bizarre simultaneous release on US cable network Peacock), and holy pizzeria the fans are rushing to the box office. It’s now officially horror’s power-studio Blumhouse’s biggest opening weekend movie in its history. But anyone with kids could tell you that they saw this blockbuster coming.
Based on Scott Cawthon’s video game and series of novels of the same name this adaptation has taken 8 years to finally make it onto the screen. Bouncing from studio to studio until Blumhouse took on the project a couple of years ago.
So, the film…
Mike, a troubled young man haunted by the fractured memory of the kidnapping of his younger brother gets a job at a spooky closed-down family pizzeria, Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza Place. Soon after clocking-on things start to go whirr, clunk, and bump in the night as the animatronic characters throughout the place appear to be more than meets the eye.
By the way, the involvement of Jim Henson’s Creature Shop in bringing these animatronic characters to life were a very welcome enhancement to the film, CGI would most definitely have been a wrong move here.
For any fans out there, this film relies very heavily on the novels as source material over the video game itself. Often touching loosely on back stories involving the various characters, so there’s enough in-joke nods to satiate FNAF fans. But the plot itself is pretty flimsy but as it’s aimed at younger horror fans that’s absolutely fair enough. Also there’s a bit of fun bloodless gore the kids will love!
The Prognosis:
It’s routinely spooky, the acting is solid, the jump scares are plentiful… that damn balloon boy, geez!!
Look if you’re flying blind going into this then you’re probably going to be a little let down but at the end of the day this film isn’t for you. It’s a fun filmic representation of a beloved horror game and book series that’s aimed squarely at the fans and young horror fans alike.
No doubt that after the success of the first one, there will definitely be more to follow.
Described as a suppressed footage film Subject is painfully constrained as it drip feeds paranoia, isolation, desperation and claustrophobia in a tightly wound up exposition. Director Tristan Barr who also stars in the feature essentially squeezes out every ounce of his experimentation into human frailty with the minimum amount he has at hand. The fact that his budget is tight, relies heavily on the delivery and execution, shifting perspectives along the way, and testing his character and the audience with every frame.
Dalensky (Barr) is a man about to serve a lengthy prison sentence but is intercepted by a secret government agency who offer him a deal in exchange for commuting his sentence. All he has to do is spend time in an isolated facility and monitor a strange creature. What appears to be a straight forward contract soon unravels to reveal the true question beneath it all… who is the real subject under scrutiny?
The Prognosis:
The real quality of Subject is from the approach that Barr takes on. To weave a troubled and tensely riddled piece though the constraints on show is cleverly told through a gradual process that steadily places its central character under the spotlight, By providing his audience with little clues to the history of his protagonist, Barr tweaks out the core of the matter, so that we are deprived of the full picture till the last. The journey to get there is equally magnified as he ramps up the tension. While it’s not ground-breaking, there’s enough energy on the screen and smarts in the direction to make this a bold entry into his experimental canon of work thus far from behind the camera.
It Lives Inside should be applauded for bringing a heartfelt Indian horror story to a wider audience. It certainly ticks all the boxes as it leans into its folk-inspired narrative in order to firmly grab your attention and delve into a tale of twisted and macabre origins.
Sam (Megan Suri) is an Indian-American teenager, struggling to fit into the westernised ideals and expectations of society, and favours this lifestyle to her cultural background, looking to curb her identity in order to ‘fit-in’.
This leads to a serious falling out with her former best friend, Tamira (Mohana Krishnan) and in the throes of their angst, they unwittingly unleash a demon that feeds on loneliness. The catch 22 for Sam is the further she strives to meet in with American idolism, the further she strays from her own kind and her background. In doing so, she becomes more and more isolated; a feast for the demon who haunts her.
The Prognosis:
Bishal Dutta tries his hand at a feature length directorial debut and serves up a fairly decent offering, Dutta plays to his strengths in order to produce his and co-writer Ashish Mehta’s vision, harnessing a story embedded with his own roots and cultural perspectives, whilst infusing with a contrasting world. Where he leans into the horror movie tropes, the heightened reaction received from the trailer doesn’t quite meet up to expectations. That’s not to say that you won’t be treated to a solid showing as It Lives Inside ticks along nicely and will entertain regardless.
There’s nothing more engaging than a movie that wears its heart on its sleeve, and for Director Nahnatchka Khan it’s clear from her work on writing and producing American Dad and Fresh Off The Boat that she has a fingers permanently on the comedic pulse. There’s a fresh energy to be found and along with the nostalgic vibes that she is going for in her latest outing behind the camera, Totally Killer.
Starring Kiernan Shipka (The Blackcoat’s Daughter) Totally Killer is a warped cross between 80s teen slasher and Back The Future of which there are continuous references throughout. There’s even a salute to the works of John Hughes and especially Molly Ringwald. The movie already speaks to my heart being a kid who grew up with all of these elements and more, infusing my love for the celluloid art.
Thirty years ago, “The Sweet Sixteen Killer” known for the amount of times he stabbed his victims, went on a killing spree in a smalltown, and was never caught. Now in the present day, Jamie Hughes (Shipka) is an ungrateful, cooler than cool teen, who’s Mum, Pam (Julie Bowen) is killed by someone carrying the same M.O. as the infamous killer, and is pulled off in a Screamesque way, ala Drew Barrymore, by offing a notable actress in the first reel. Thankfully though, Jamie’s best friend, Kelcey (Amelia Creston) has invented a time machine in the form of a photo booth. When Jamie tries to unearth her mother’s killer, she has to fight for her life, leading her into said time machine and then transported back to… you guessed it 1987 and just before the original killings began. She now has the opportunity to rewrite history, find and stop the killer, and save her Mum.
The Prognosis:
There have been some notable comparisons stated online between Totally Killer and The Final Girls, which on paper is understandable, but this Blumhouse produced flick has a very different energy about it, namely due to Shipka’s performance and the script which zings along at a highly infectious and engaging pace. Shipka is also supported well by her fellow cast members, namely through her teen Mum, Pamela Miller, played by Olivia Holt (who is herself moulded through the House of Mouse, starting with the kids’ series Kickin’ It). While some of the beats do misfire on occasion, it is the heart of the movie that lifts you up and guides you through an enjoyable whodunit.
Totally Killer is currently streaming on Amazon Prime.
Having secretly shot the latest instalment in the V/H/S/ franchise back-to-back alongside V/H/S/99, Bloody Disgusting are set to release V/H/S/85 on the streaming platform, Shudder. This time around sees one of the pioneer directors of the franchise David Bruckner (The Ritual) with his segment Amateur Night return to add more flavour to the proceedings. It’s clear that Bruckner is going from strength to strength in his storytelling with a bent towards science fiction, evident with bringing Hellraiser before a contemporary audience. Bruckner’s V/H/S. Segment Total Copy is peppered throughout the feature and follows a group of college teachers pushing past their skillset into untapped territory. In doing so, they venture into a domain that slowly spirals out of control.
Joining Bruckner is a team of bold visionists, each with their own unique style spilling forth into an eclectic union of enterprising stories. My own personal liking leans towards Scott Derrickson’s (Sinister) segment Dreamkill; which is a psychic-bending, slasher frenzy that twists and turns delightfully towards a gripping climax. For fans of Derrickson’s work, there is an easter egg in there which arcs back to one of the characters from The Black Phone. Another segment I enjoyed was No Wake, directed by Mike P. Nelson (Wrong Turn) who feels as though he is in his element with his traditional found footage tale set on a lake retreat. We follow a group of teens who get more than they bargained for when they are slowly being picked off by a hidden assailant, and then pick up the tale further into the feature when we see the story complete from the assassin’s point of view. The other two entries are just as compelling with Natasha Kermani’s segment TKNOGD; following performance artists tackle technological gods and Gigi Saul Guerrero’s (Bingo Hell) segment, God of Death, taking you to the depths of Mexico in the wake of an earthquake which has awoken a once dormant God.
The Prognosis:
For its’ sixth entry into the franchise, V/H/S/85 is arguably the most diverse and compelling. It allows each director to spin their tale using their individual voices, without the detriment to the final reel. Enjoyable and fragmented to create a blend of disturbing, visionary narratives.
– Saul Muerte
V/H/S/85 is screening on Shudder from Friday 6th October.
Having already placed a haunting, psychological tale in a public convenience, starring Ryan Kwanten in Glorious, director Rebekah McKendry has established that she conveys stories from the most unusual setting. Her latest venture to hit Shudder, chooses to relocate to an elevator. The substance of the movie lays ground in an online phenomenon where people play a specific game to test their fears and the spectral myth that once you have ridden any elevator whilst stopping at a set order of floors, to invoke a ghost. The trick is to not open your eyes when you reach the fifth floor, or end up haunted to your own death by the female phantom.
Told from the perspective of high school graduates who run an online series debunking similar urban legends. They fall down on their luck when their sponsor threatens to pull the plug unless they can turn around a successful show by the turn of the week. Thankfully, or maybe not?, the team meets Ryan (Gino Anania) who presents them with the afore-mentioned game. The hook, or catch in this instance is that not only is the urban legend real, but Ryan’s sister may have been a victim and he believes the team are also responsible. Fuelled by vengeance and the search for truth beyond the known world, Ryan will go to all costs to seek it out.
The Prognosis:
I’ll be honest here. The thought of yet another social media horror feature immediately halted my need to watch this film, but it is markedly better than a few i’d like to mention.. Ahem Countdown or… cough Unfriended. Elevator Game does unfortunately share one characteristic though… unlikeable characters, so yes that in itself is part of the game, to watch these deviants get their comeuppance, but in this instance it comes at the cost of the film.
It’s fairly obvious who will end up in the finale, such is the predictability on show, but it’s still a fun ride. It also misses some of the humour present in Glorious too. Mark this up as a missed opportunity to elevate her career, but still promise that she may still reach the penthouse suite if McKendry keeps producing solid outings.
Upon its 10th instalment, the Saw franchise poses an interesting timeline for John Kramer (Tobin Bell) and his devoted followers in order to continue the journey through the various physical and psychological traps that the numerous victims have had to endure. I realise at the time of writing that the Saw film series has become an essential entry into the horror genre with its iconic visual conundrums, and a serial killer with a mantra to cleanse the world of the mistakes we make and thereby absolving humanity through an excruciating ordeal. Besides perhaps Scream, there hasn’t been a horror film series through the 2000s that has had the kind of impact and idiosyncratic themes that lure its audience in. There are some that may say that the franchise has strayed a little from the initial premise, getting lost within its own compendium of complexities focusing on the elaborate persecution devices. The last instalment, Spiral: From the Book of Saw starring Chris Rock promised to take the series into a whole new direction, and expand the metaverse while keeping the mystery and brutality of the original at its core. It also posed the first in the franchise not to star John Kramer in its fold, so it is somewhat surprising that the latest venture, Saw X marks a return of the serial killer and some other notable faces to boot. Although Rock’s multiverse vision was thwarted by lower than expected box office return, which could be why Twisted Pictures and Lionsgate Films chose to jump back into the realm, and pull into what made the series so great? That question probably speaks for itself, but let’s delve a little deeper.
The most prominent decision was to try and add a little empathy towards our loveable villain, a tricky concept to execute when we’ve spent eight stories of the macabre which does exactly the opposite. We love Kramer’s exploits because of his cold-hearted and callous approach to retribution. So, to try and fill a back story into his plight and facing the cancer demon that threatens his life, sits as an uncomfortable juxtaposition to his exploits. It is for good reason, but we’re treated to some meaty exposition to Kramer’s personal ordeal as he is conned by a group of experimental medics who promise a false dawn in treating his brain tumour. There’s even some tongue-in-cheek quips on his road to supposed salvation. One the half an hour / forty minute rug is pulled from under his feet, Kramer pulls out the WD-40 and oils down the elaborate machinery and sets to work enacting revenge on those who wronged him and the twisted fun truly begins. One thing’s for sure… never piss off John Kramer.
The traps themselves are delightfully disturbing albeit primitive when compared to the lengths that we’re used to. Then again, this fits nicely into the timeline, presumably set between Saw and Saw 2. It is however, the reintroduction of Amanda Young (Shawnee Smith) that adds heart to the piece as she is being taken under Kramer’s wing and we’re not only reminded of her tragic story arc yet-to-come but also of Smith’s performance range, which has been much missed in later additions to the series. She also counter-balances Kramer’s personality who is consumed by his mantra. The moments of inner conflict that Amanda experience throughout the torture sequences is fundamental to hanging the false integrity that pilots Kramer, and the problematic stockholm syndrome facet that Amanda is presented with.
The Prognosis:
This latest instalment of the Saw franchise plays out like a love song to what made the series so great. While it never quite reaches the height of the macabre and twisted delights of the original trilogy, it does paint the story with a familiar trait, rekindling our love for the world of Saw with John Kramer and his cohorts. If you can be patient enough to sit through the opening act, fans of the series will be treated to some dark fun and relish in Kramer’s disturbing approach to retribution.
Having already established an impressive turn in Godless: The Eastfield Exorcism, Georgia Eyers turns out another remarkable performance for Steven Milhaljevich’s sophomore feature, Violett. The scene is set in harrowing circumstances as a series of child disappearances have dominated a small, local town. Sonya (Myers) is a tormented mother, who lives in fear with the local community, consumed by the shock and turmoil that these events have taken. For Sonya, who we learn is struggling with an undefined mental illness, struggles in a constant state of paranoia that her 11 year old daughter, Violett (Valentina Blagojevic) will be snatched away at any given moment.
Drifting through life in this perpetual frenzy that has left her stagnating in the world, dormant to the life around her and disconnected from her husband, Stan (Sam Dudley – The Dustwalker). It is through her mind snap that Sonya starts to suffer from visions that confound and complex her understanding and the lines of reality are blurred. Is there more to be uncovered from this affliction that she has come to endure? Can she really trust herself? And is there greater danger in exposing the truth?
The Prognosis:
Milhaljevich encapsulates what it means to wallow in grief and trauma, enhancing this emotion and draining away all other sentiment. His vision is all the more intensified through Eyers representation of a mother on the brink of sanity and existence; and Shane Piggot’s cinematography, which perfectly embodies the spirit of the piece and emboldens the surrealism.
All of these components lay weight to an experience that leaves its mark on the audience and demonstrates that Milhaljevich has a unique voice, and one that presents itself with a clear identity; one that will highlight any future ventures with decisive interest.
Here’s the thing with James Wan and the Conjuring Universe. The credo “if they don’t care, they don’t scare” runs strong with him. For Wan & co, scares are good, but tension is better.
Which instantly tells you, they think about their films. And by that, I mean, they seem to air-check. them. Especially new ones they enter into their franchise.
What evidence do we have to support this? Three off the top of our head, Annabelle Creation, The Conjuring 2 and Insidious 2. (Although before you get up in arms, YES we know technically Insidious isn’t part of the TCU, but spiritually it is – pun intended)
So, what do these movies have in common? Answer: they are all better than their chronological predecessor. (Although I’ll also admit this is a bit of a stretch with The Conjuring, as that was a pretty decent first outing. But its sequel is arguably at least as strong). And back to the point at hand, re: the other 2 films, as far as Annabelle (blah) and Insidious (paint-by-numbers) is concerned, their 2nd instalments are magnitudes better.
It’s as if the Wan production ethos is to sit down and say “Ok. I know we made money off these. films, but where can we make them better? And what mistakes can we eliminate?”.
If this is true, it’s a very egoless way to run a production company (very rare in real life). And regardless, the results speak for themselves; for whatever you think about the Wan cinematic. universe, you have to admit there is something to the formula he and his team have developed. Sure, their flicks are slick and therefore overtly “Hollywood”, but they are successful, and they are. not afraid to develop & improve within their mainstream constraints.
So, it was with this framework I went into the Nun II a little keen. After all, even taking OUT the above elements as a factor, the first film was so excrementally ordinary the filmmakers could have got an Ai bot to write the script (YIKE! Uber sensitive topic at the time I’m publishing this – be interesting to see how that all plays out, eh? Saul Muerte?) and it would have been better by a factor of 11.
Anyway – The Nun II picks up a year (We think…? It’s never really stated) after the first movie and 2 of our main leads are still with us. Taissa Farmiga’s Sister Irene, and Jonas Bloquet’s Maurice (Frenchie).
The 3rd lead from the first film – Demian Bichir’s Father Burke – we soon learn has died off camera. between movies. An accident? Or tactical foresight by Bichir? Maybe the demon did it…
For those of you who remember how we left it at the end of movie 1, The Nun was beaten, BUT Frenchie was exorcist style infected by it. So he’s like a bad guy now….
And this new film doesn’t forget that, but they also go the route that Frenchie doesn’t control the Nun possessing him; so he’s back to being a good guy, trying to stop the Nun from doing….what exactly?
Well, it turns out she needs him to kill a bunch of people who are protecting an artifact macguffin that will give her super-duper powers (or something) although the exact same artefact can inversely. destroy her (natch).
Sister Irene is then pitted along with a new sidekick Sister Debra, played by Missing’s Storm Reid) to take on The Nun in a school that is built over a deconsecrated monastery. (Frenchie works as a caretaker in that school, you see).
Cue jump scares and what not.
The main cast is mostly female – yet more fuel for anti-woke men to lose their shit over… oh won’t anybody think of the men!?? – with Narnia’s Anna Popplewell in the mix in a role thoroughly underwhelming for her talent.
For you see, the Wan sequel formulae has failed this instalment big time; to the point I’m having a hard time disbelieving he sat down in front of his team and said “Hey – in the spirit of switching things up, how about we make this one worse?”.
It had such a low bar to jump over, but the Nun II is not only ordinary, it commits the unforgiveable sin of not being scary. Like… at all. The movie at best has about 2 to 3 creepy moments, and that’s it. The plot is holey (geddit) and internal logic wise, it just makes no sense. Even down to who the Nun actually is. At several points she seems to appear in several guises at once as her nun avatar and its original demon form Valek; but if it has the ability to be in more than 2 places at once in multiple forms, then why does it even bother? By definition such power makes it impossible to beat, as she can be anywhere she wants to be, yet it seems to go out of its way to not kill anyone (unless it’s a random character we don’t care about – see 2nd sentence of this review) and its ability to appear in different forms at different (or the same) time have no logical consistency at all.
Tassia Farmiga is utterly charmless (which is partially the fault of her character. But even if she is an unworldly emissary of God, she can still be funny, or witty, or steely or something! Instead, she presents as older and boring-er than she was the first-time round). Plus, several other characters make some truly idiotic decisions.
The Prognosis:
Not just disappointing, it’s completely pointless. And to prove this with facts, it’s box office return is already TRIPLE its budget. In an age where the inmates run the asylum, what further proof do you need? Nun.
Saving Grace is an example of what Australian filmmakers do well; embellish the natural beauty of the landscape, whilst exposing the hidden dangers both in topography and in the psychology of those who walk the country.
The directing, writing partnership of Gareth Carr and David Sullivan work well together in slowly drawing out these concealments of character, ebbing away at the exterior to expose the true intentions.
Sarah (Kirsty McKenzie – Magic) is a live-in care worker, who discovers her patient has passed away. Seeking a chance for change, Sarah abandons the chaos of city life to take up residence in a serene, idyllic location to look after an elderly lady (the titular Grace). Grace is incapacitated and mute, so requires 24 hour care as a result.
Surrounded by waterways, Sarah seeks refuge during her downtime, but the remote setting is shared by the resident gardener, Albert (Gary Boulter – Skinford), a man who’s friendly demeanour warrants closer scrutiny, as does his tale of Grace’s past.
This is only part of Sarah’s concerns though, as she begins to have dark visions, forcing her to plough headlong into ominous terrain where every choice is questioned, and suspicions heightened.
The Prognosis:
Kirsty McKenzie is profound in her portrayal of Sarah, twisting and turning through every decision she makes, as the narrative equally flitters in an unpredictable way. It’s a compelling approach by the film makers, allowing for our trust to reside in the characters and the land in which it is set. Trust though, is the very thing that we, the viewer, can not rely upon. Beauty is only skin deep and just as our eyes rely upon what we see, this can be deceptive, allowing Carr and Sullivan to play with our senses, and our securities, before veering us into a entrancing-yet-disturbing direction.
Surgeons of Horror 