TYTD Reviews

Jumping into 'Ouija' I was trying to be somewhat hopeful. Im always trying to broaden my horizons when it comes to more 'contemporary' Horror as a way of working on myself. So! I queued it up, got comfy…aaaaand not a whole lot happened…I kind of wish I could be kinder to this one. But theres very little I can really say to be any more precise than that.

The plot follows 'Laine' the older of two sisters who's living with her 'Nonna' and is living the bog standard high school student life with her best friend 4eva 'Debbie'. The film opens establishing that, even as kids, Debbie and Laine used to mess around with an 'Ouija' board. but back then they were just goofing around, and didnt really know what they were getting into.

Skip forward to the present day, and Laine is growing concerned for Debbie, who is becoming increasingly recluse. As it turns out, Debbie has found a new 'Ouija' board in her house, and…after messing around with it by herself (something the film tells us we must NEVER do.) Debbie winds up dead. Laine cant quite believe her friend has gone, and her circle of associates gather to both attend the funeral, and look out for a devestated Laine.

When Laine feels like she needs to contact Debbie one more time, she discovers Debbies Ouija board and manages to convince her friends and her younger sister Sarah to take part in a seance to see if they can contact Debbie and get closure on the whole thing.

Unfortunately; it doesnt really work out that way, and things quickly begin to spiral out of control, as Debbie and her friends may have actually unleashed more than they bargained for. Leading Laine and the group on a hunt through the houses history, and a terrifying history of witchcraft and the dark arts, all of which is connected to the dissapearence of a young girl…and a spirit board brimming with evil…

And the quick caption summary for this 'horror' film, is theres about 25 minutes of actual honest to goodness haunted house shenanigans, married up to about an hours worth of plot that could best be described as an after school special on the subject of 'The death of a loved one'.

This films biggest problem is the pacing. its glacial. its painfully slow in places, annoyingly slow, as we watch characters basically explain absolutely EVERYTHING In painful detail, leaving almost nothing for the film to actually 'SHOW'. and the one or two twists that DO come up here are undercut with overt foreshadowing that is clearly designed for people who lack media literacy skills.

Tonally; its a bit murky, theres definitely a horror element here, but the overwhelming feeling is more of a 'Drama' in my opinion…and not a particularly great one at that. The characters all feel painfully surface level to the point that I have to assume the film makers assumed that a flashback at the beginning was enough to flesh them out. they arnt complex, they dont feel 'lived in' these are characters that exist for as long as the film flickers on the screen, and the SECOND the credits roll hits, they're off into the ether. barely able to hold things together even at the height of the films action.

The dialogues bland, the act structuring feels sluggish and inconsistent, theres no clear act change transitions, it just rumbles on, occasionally remembering its a horror film, at which point it delivers 5-10 good minutes of quite well put together horror plotting…before getting back to 'Dawsons Creek'.

From here, we basically just run through 'acceptable' across the board. The direction is to a studio standard…which here means it isnt abysmal, but it is absolutely the barest minimum of whats needed to be considered 'Studio quality'. the vision is beige, but firmed up, the direction of the sequences has a few flickers of originality muddled in there, but this is almost a year after 'The Conjuring' reset the standard for the 'haunted house' movie, and since then 'Insideous' and 'Sinister' had only taken the genre from strength to strength. leaving this one feeling a little bland by comparison.

Same goes for the cine, shots are fine, and the horror elements do have some pretty satisfying moments here and there, but again; its nothing groundbreaking and ultimately over 10 years on, this feels a bit overly generic. When I can say 'Sterling Entertainment' films have had more imaginative direction and cine…I hope that goes some way to say just how by the numbers and bland this gets at time.

The cast do the best they can with the script, I cant fault their performances honestly, but I can fault the dialogue they've been given to work with. They have a reasonable physical energy, at times they drift into 'Asylum' terratory with the line deliveries. But across the board I think they're all just about of a 'standard' maybe occasionally drifting into 'stiff' terratory on deliveries. And; as an aside, theres a LOT of CGI in this…not all of it good, and it does impact the performances because I get the feeling that the cast either wernt aware of what effects were going to be used in the final cut. Or they were told, but didnt have it explained. Because sometimes their reactions dont really match the CG thats happening on screen.

The soundtracks ultimatley kind of unmemorable too. mainly drone and string arrangements…nothing remarkable. my only compliment being that at least the sound balance is okay, no major audio jump scares…

All in all? I didnt hate 'Ouija'…but its a VERY beige production. It takes an age to get going, when it finally does build up some steam it splutters while doing so, the plot is fine, but the dialogues rough, and the direction, cine and scoring are largely either copying other movies from this time, or the safest most overly beige options…

As a result, I cant personally recommend this one. its not bad enough for me to come out swinging at it, and; as a 'background movie' I think its okay enough…But there are FAR FAR better films out there that tackle this kind of thing. And I think this 'Spooky season' you absolutely can do better.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/ouija/

So this year throughout Halloween, me and the missus have decided to take a trip through all of 'The Conjuring' movies. And kicking things off, we have the original entry that started the 11 film franchise that just WILL NOT DIE.

Yes, its the original 'Conjuring', a 'Based on a true story' style adaptation of the 1971 story of the Perron family, a young couple with 5 daughters who move into a farm house that is NOT *The* Amityville house…only to find that things take a turn for the spooky.

When the Warrrens come into the area to give a series of lecture talks, mother Carolyn reaches out to the paranormalists to investigate…only to unearth the terrifying reality that their family home…has basically been the epicenter of a dozen grizzly murders all stemming back to the awful tale of a witch who took her own life on a tree near the family home, cursing the land in the process.

Together, the Warrens and the Perrons (alongside local law enforcement) must work together to try and cleanse the house of the evil spirits, before things go too far out out of control!

And all round? I can absolutely see why this is a much loved modernization of the 'Haunted House' film. It has the grounding of it being loosely based on a true story, but the modern film making techniques to help give it the kind of glossy sheen that the likes of the original 'Amityville horror' or 'The Evil Dead' cant really compete with. As for me? I can absolutely appreciate this one for what it is, a sturdy paranormal horror film. But I dont *personally* think I enjoy this one as much as I do films like 'Insideous' or the 'Sinister' series.

Across the board everythings really pretty solid. The script tells a compelling story, its paced out rather well, tonally its consistent across the runtime, having the script based of real life accounts means that the characters feel much more real and complex than had this been a total work of fiction. The dialogues a little bit pompus in places…but Its all thematic tone setting, so I can kind of give it a pass on that front.

What I cant excuse however is the runtime, clocking in at just shy of 2 hours, the pacing at times here is meandering. Some would say its contextualizing, or getting us fully bedded into our characters for the film. But I say that this could have been 15-20 minutes shorter and would have been a LOT lot better. As it stands? At the length it runs to, I found myself struggling to really stay engaged with the plot when things got a bit too 'all American Schmaltz' or when they were just…existing and not really doing much else.

Outside of that though, The rest of the film is pretty solid. The directions got a very clear and distinct vision, so much so that it clearly helped influence most low budget haunted house movies of the last 13 years. theres some really nice suspense moments across the runtime and some effective sequences that have been intentionally planned out to leave the audience not *quite* sure what they're looking at.

Direction of the cast *is* a little theatrical for my blood, lacking that grittier roughness of a 'of real life' performance. But on the whole, I think its solid, the cast are fairly reactive, hit their marks, and the scenes have clearly been marked out for maximum shock and scare factor.

The cine is also pretty solid, while it has to be said, some of the CGI is starting to show its age a bit. on the whole compositions are distinct, creative and feel great. sequences are fairly well crafted, the edit is rock solid and theres plenty of B-roll to help keep things fresh, flowing and moving along.

Performances are largely solid too, the obvious limelight stealer here is Lili Taylor as Carolyn Perron, she gets a really meaty duel performance across the runtime that really showcases her versatility and capability as a performer, she felt like one of the more believable performances, and is almost worth the price of admission alone! Credit also has to go to the Warrens themselves Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga, who both come across as sincere, if not a little preachy as the Warrens, again getting a good versatile range to work with and delivering exactly what you wanna see when you come to a paranormal spooky movie.

The rest of the cast unfortunately do run the gauntlet from just about believable, to just a bit dry and awkward, to 'Asylum' level performances…its a mixed bag and probably the weakest element of this production on the whole if im being honest.

And finally, the soundtrack! Which is a solid semi orchestral work with a few contemporary jukebox tracks dropped in, it definitely creates a solid atmosphere, but im not sure if id say it was particularly memorable. This film also commits the cardinal sin of doing audio jumpscares and mixing the audio tracks VERY poorly…meaning for the most part I had to have subtitles on to even figure out what was being said, and frequently the film would go from characters mumbling border inaudibly, to a jumpscare sting that damn near ruptured next DOORS eardrums…letalone my own…

All in all? 'The Conjuring' is absolutely a solid horror film from the 2010's…sometimes mainstream horror films are mainstream BECAUSE they're just really quite well made, and I think this one almost certainly is that way. While I have my own personal issues with this one. I can acknowledge that this was a fun watch ultimately, one I've watched a few times over the years, and no doubt will watch again. I can recommend it if you havent seen it before, if nothing else so that you can appreciate where most of the films that imitate this one got their ideas from. Just buckle up for that hour and 52 runtime, because it feels every bit as long as that runtime suggests!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-conjuring/

A fabulous little supercut/youtube poop offering found on Tubi. essentially its just over an hour of SOV, instructional tape and other sourced footage dedicated to old pitch himself. A mesmorising watch, it reminds me quite heavily of the AGFA Mystery tape series. But its a bit more gassed up, a lot quicker paced, not afraid to get a bit trippy, and less focussed on showing VHS oddities, and more focussed on remixing said oddities into a hazy brew of visuals.

I really liked it! I thought it was very well edited (if not a little fast paced for my personal taste) and had a lot of clips I hadnt seen before. So this is definitely one I can recommend if you like this kind of thing. Apparently, the company behind this has been doing it for years with tons of different focal points. So I feel like I've struck a solid oil line here with this group! I'll definitely be checking out more in future!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-great-satan/

I've been a fan of Norm Macdonald for a number of years, and his unfortunate demise in 2021 sent me down a rabbit hole of trying to track down some of his more 'Complete' work, as a lot of what i'd seen had been television appearances or interviews. That was how I landed on 'Dirty Work' and after keeping it on my 'watch list' for a number of years, Vinegar Syndrome decided to release it in 4k…which I promptly snatched up…Then it sat in my 'To Watch' pile for a while…I wasnt THAT invested…anyway; I watched it.

The plot is pretty simple, Norm plays Mitch, a man with one clear life value. He doesnt take crap from anyone. In the past, this meant getting revenge on those that wronged him in increasingly chaotic and creative ways. However; time passes and in his 30s Mitch finds himself fired from several jobs, broken up with and having to live at his friend Sams house with his increasingly perverted and aggressive father.

Things go from bad to worse, when 'Pops' suffers a massive heart attack, and because he's old and not famous. He's at the bottom of the donor list. That is until a doctor offers Mitch and Sam a proposition, if they can find 50 grand to help the doctor pay off the bookies, the doctor will pull some strings to push Pops to the top of the donor list.

At first, the pair try several jobs to little or no success…Until a chance encounter gives MItch the push he needs. they'll open a 'revenge for hire' business. Its simple, you call with a grievence, Mitch and Sam turn up and get revenge, get paid and get the money to save Pops.

However, when they end up in front of rich businessman Travis Cole who offers to fully fund their venture. They find themselves embroiled in a situation that may cost them absolutely everything.

For the purpose of this review I should clarify that I watched the 'Dirtier' version of this film, apparently that means theres a few extended and additional scenes that take it from a PG13 rating to an R rating. more edgy jokes etc…Its kind of hard to tell whats been added/removed to make it the R cut, because this was a comedy made in 1998 and, realistically; the amount of political incorrectness here kind of makes it hard to tell what was '90s' acceptable…and what wasnt.

In either case, I was very pleasantly surprised by this one, the script is solid, moves at a clip, has a good clean 3 act structure and has a quite satisfying ending. The tone is very much in line with Norms usual style of dry and acidic humour. Very self aware, very much willfully obtuse. And to that end, this thing has a hell of a hit rate on gags. I laughed openly pretty much every couple of minutes on this, which given its a fairly 'hidden' 90s comedy, makes it something of a hidden gem really.

The cast all get a decent share of the gags, with it being a 90s comedy, you CAN expect to see multiple VERY non PC gags make it in, its a known hazard that comes with the terratory, so expect several rape and homophobic gags alongside other bits in dribs and drabs. If you can stomach those pitfalls though, the rest is really quite funny and a good introduction to Norms usual style.

The direction and cine are both studio grade, not a whole lot to report on that front from me, its a solid enough shot MGM piece that doesnt exactly elevate the genre. But it gets the job done and almost all of the visual gags are handled extremely well. compositions are solid, sequences flow effortlessly, theres a really nice vibrant colour palette. the cast all know exactly how to time their gags and where they should be placed on set. Its a really solid work that helps to keep things chugging along.

The real surprise for me was the cast roster. This film is STUDDED. and I *mean* STUDDED with more comedy royalty that I can even begin to list. WIth key players being Norm (obviously) Don RIckles, Chris Farley, Chevy Chase, John Goodman, Traylor Howard and a not insignificant number of deeper cut stand up comics from the time. Honestly, I didnt expect that many known faces to turn up for a somewhat obscure picture. and again, they REALLY help to smooth over any issues and bring the thing to life.

Add to that a good little 'Jukebox' soundtrack mixing contemporary 90s pop such as Green day, Chumbawumba and Third eye blind with the likes of ACDC, Rupert Holmes and KMFDM. Its a solid soundtrack that does sound a little bit 'noisy' at times…but again, victim of the times unfortunatley on that front. Its positively nostalgic at this point and also raised a few laughs to boot!

All in all, I went into 'Dirty Work' with somewhat lowered expectations given how buried it had been over the years. But having now seen it, I was actually very pleasently surprised. I dont think it'd land quite as well with younger audiences today. I think you very much had to live through the times to really properly 'get' it. But if you were around in the 90s, and you know what your getting into with late 90's early 2000s gross out comedies…Then I think you'll be very pleasently surprised. I really enjoyed it, and Id absolutely recommend it to anyone looking for a 90s comedy 'fix'

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/dirty-work-1998/

Decided to catch the 'Rifftrax' version today. Honestly, I think Mike and the gang were the only thing stopping this stink bomb from falling into the sea.

'Hillbillys in a HAunted House' is about an hour long and is best summed up as follows:

A group of country singers lose their way on the way to a country jamboree, they end up getting directions to a spooky house, in the house it turns out theres some no goodnicks looking to do…something! To make these country singers leave. They dont. Cue a ton of sitting around, intercut with country music numbers, and eventually one of the gangs female singers wanders off, gets kidnapped, a gorilla shows up…and…the house they're stopping in may or may not actually be haunted.

Its a slog of a watch, the mirth of 'Hillbilly' antics can only really carry this film so far, NOTHING happens for the vast majority of the runtime, the dialogue is aiming for jovial but lands in just plain strange. The characters arnt that interesting either…and not even David Carradine and Basil Rathbone can bring the vibe up.

The films biggest flaw? its a haunted house movie with very VERY little 'Haunting' and certainly no 'Horror' to be had. its just a very dry, not particularly funny musical comedy set in a haunted house that isnt all that haunted.

VIsually its a bit of a wash too. It reminded me HEAVILY of 'Monsters Crash the Pyjama Party' its all quite flat, bland undressed sets, colour palettes that feel washed out and drab. Theres nothing here to grab the eye or catch the attention. It just feels like a lame duck.

Throw in some subpar acting and songs that are just…SO souless…and you've got the perfect makings of a stinker of a picture. Dont get me wrong! This is by no means one of the worst movies ever made! It does have one or two jokes that land quite well, and like a broken clock, our main male leads do manage to make a gag or two land well! But as I said at the start of this review, if it wasnt for the rifftrax gang VERY much adding some seasoning to this cold, wet, unseasoned chicken breast of a movie. I dont think it would have been anywhere near as enjoyable a watch.

I can recommend the rifftrax dub. I absolutely cant recommend the film itself…oooh boy its a stinker.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/hillbillys-in-a-haunted-house/

Popped this on while having my evening meal. A not unpleasent, but ultra basic rundown of 50 of the *alleged* worst movies ever made.

I refuse to take a authoritive list seriously that has 'Troll' in there…but not 'Troll 2'. The choices are questionable at best, and not exactly insightful…that being said, it gave me 10 films I haven't seen before that I need to check out sometime…so its got that going for it!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-50-worst-movies-ever-made/

What do you do if your a director sitting on three unfinished films that have the potential to make it big, but not the budget or time to get them over the line? Well! if your Jay Schlossberg-Cohen, the answer is, you do some ADR work to smooth over the gaps in the narrative, make some VERY questionable cuts to try and jump around in the narrative, film about 15 minutes of new footage as a framing device and get a relative to boogie down 'Monster Club' style turning 3 unfinished features into an Anthology that'll have you wondering 'WE CHOSE TO WATCH *THIS* ON HALLOWEEN!?'

That, is 'Night Train to Terror' a cobbled together mid 80s anothology feature that had a limited release at first, and found revived interest on the home video market (particularly with Vinegar syndromes Bluray release). And…well, I dont think its particularly 'good'! but its definitely a vibe!

As mentioned the film comprises of three unfinished films: One revolving around a hospital that appears to be kidnapping people for unknown reasons (a proto 'Hostel' if you will…), the second revolving around a young female musician who falls in with a rich old man who promises her fame and fortune…which turns out to be regular work in 'Adult' films, when a young college grad catches one of her features at a stag party, he hunts the woman down and steals her from the rich old man…leading them both into the arms of a strange 'Saw' like cult dedicated to death by increasingly bizarre methods…

And a finale revolving around a coven of (what I assume are) either Nazi vampires or Nazi demons who've been running a shadowey operation for hundreds of years…and who are about to be discovered by a woman with horrifying recurring nightmares…All of this? is framed as stories told by 'God' and 'The Devil' while they take a long train ride, destination: 'Unknown'…Oh..and for some reason, this train has a jumping rocky pop band that bop their way from station to station with the kind of 'filler' pop that really sells you on the idea this wasnt envisioned as it stands.

To judge these stories by their scripting and plot feels almost like a moot point honestly. They were unfinished films, and as 'A Night to Dismember' has taught us, seeing a re-cobbled together 'reimagining' of an end product that never actually got finished. usually winds up in a totally incomprehensible mess.

The tales told here are a *bit* more coherent, but are heavily reliant on the additional ADR narration, and their original intentions have had to be MASSIVELY paired back to fit the timings of the anthology entries…as such, I cant really comment on what could have been. But what I can say of what is here is…its messy. the plotting barely holds together for the most part, the footage pin pongs around something chronic, meaning I felt like I was constantly trying to play catch up on what exactly was going on.

The characters are largely fleshed out by the ADR narration, and the narrator for this is fine enough…nothing special, but not awful…its just that a lot of the narration is doing a LOT of heavy lifting to condense a lot of the missing footage down to a digestable and understandable format. in places, it works fine, in others I had NO idea what was actually going on.

the pacings all over the place, we'll crash through 30 minutes worth of plot in 5 minutes, and then spend 10 minutes focussing REALLY hard on a single plot point, because that was one of the few scenes that WAS filmed to completion. the tones a weird mixture of hyperactive gory horror, and campier comedy elements…but the campier elements are distinctly seperated from the stories themselves. They're only really present in the 'train' segments which, in and of themselves are filmed very nicely and are about the most sensical thing in this production.

The direction for all three films is mixed, but solid enough. I personally didnt see anything I disliked, theres some really decent stop motion effects work here that I enjoyed, some nice choices in lighting, gore effects, colour work. its nothing that I can point at and say 'THIS. is worth the price of admission!' But it is well enough handled that I would consider it a big selling point of the film, because the base plots themselves arnt really up to all that much.

Visually the film pops with colours, is very invested in early visual effects, and compositions look solid enough and feel good. sequences are incredibly messy however, scene structurings are poor and I really dont feel like we got to see the best presentation of these films…regardless of how little there was to use.

The train sequences, as mentioned are probably my favourite bits, they feel very professionally handled and, given they were more of a last minute addition to tie the films together, they actually look more expensive than the 3 full films featured.

As for the performances? Well…a lot of the film footage used is talked over by narration, there minimal dialogue here in the films themselves. And our cast are fine enough…but lets be honest, we're all here for Cameron Mitchell in the 3rd story as the Lieutenant. and…while he's not full on 'Terror in Beverley hills' here…He still gives a fun enough performance.

Throw in the scoring which mixed synthy horror beats with light pop…and this thing ultimately gave me real 'Monster Club' vibes…but without the halloween'y warmth or the charm of Vincent Price that 'The Monster Club' offers in spades.

All in all? this is a fine 'once in a blue moon' watch, its fairly nuts in places, which will make cult and low budget movie fans happy to catch it, im not entirely convinced of the 'rewatch' value though…I could see this pairing up as a later in the evening B-picture to 'The Monster Club'…But then, my brain automatically asks the question 'Well…if this is an offering that feels like a poor mans 'Monster Club' why not just watch 'The Monster Club'?!' …

Me personally? I may revisit this one again in future. and it may sit better with me in time. But as of today, it was just kind of a quirky, fun, but ultimately kind of unremarkable watch.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/night-train-to-terror/

Perfect viewing through the milky fug of a few tipples at 3am, 'Summer Camp Girls' is an adult feature brought to us by Gary Graver who you may recognise as his career seems to predominantly consist of a mixture of hard and softcore features, occasionally peppered with more 'family friendly' (I.E Not porn) horror and Sci-fi features.

I personally know Gravers work from 'Trick or Treat' the 1982 horror movie in which a kid 'Dennis the menaces' his baby sitter while an ACTUAL killer slowly stalks the family home…and 'One Million Heels B.C' the B-feature to the infamous 'Scream Queen Hot Tub Party' in which Michelle Baur plays a cavewoman thawed out in the present day who…well…you can imagine…its a softcore feature with Michelle Baur in a fur bikni…You can fill in the blanks.

'Summer Camp Girls' was shot in the earlier phase of his career. Not so early that he didnt have experience by this time, he'd already got 26 credits under his belt by this point, working a variety of different styles in Adult features AND he'd dabbled at least a couple of times with horror and sci fi. But as of today the guy has almost 150 directing credits. So being number 27, is still pretty early.

The plots about as straightforward as these films can get really. As the film opens introducing us to 'Angela' a rebellious teen woman who comes from an affluent background (her father is in some kind of organised crime syndicate) who's family are at their wits end with her. Angela likes bad boys, and has been dating (and is engaged) to a bad BAD boy. Much to her parents disapproval.

At their wits end, her father stumbles on an advert for a 'correctional' camp. 'Camp Quimm' which promises to take rebellious teens and, over several weeks, remove them from the systems that corrupt them, and turn them into model citizens. Her father is intreagued by the option and signs Angela up without hesitation, much to Angelas upset.

On arriving at the camp however, Angela finds that this 'all girls' camp is full of teens like her, who, conveniently, more or less all have the same background and story to her…So she quite quickly gets on and makes several friends.

It looks like its going to be a dull, dry, chaste summer…BUT AS LUCK WOULD HAVE IT, Literally on the outskirts of the camp, a couple of bikers called 'J.D' and 'Animal' have set up camp while their brothers are passing through the area, they've already captured one girl 'Carla' as their prize. and J.D is looking to bed as many of the camp girls as possible. Leading to the camp councillors to place a ban on them coming into the camp, or any of the girls leaving.

As you can imagine, J.D takes a liking to Angela, much to Carlas AGGRESSIVE disapproval. But it doesnt take too long for the girls of the camp to start climbing the walls looking for men, with two of the girls trying to molest the only male camp councillor on the grounds, who refuses to reciprocate because he'd lose his job, and the other girls planning a daring break to seek flesh.

When news of the breakout hits the staff, they panic and begin plans to try and recapture the girls. This is made all the more complicated however, when Angelas father gets word of bikers and breakouts and sends a memo out to say he'll be visiting the camp in two hours time, and he expects the camp to be full, and the tone to be 'celibate.' Leading to a race against time to recapture the girls before they have TOO much fun.

And…on the whole this is a somewhat upbeat, but surprisingly aggressive adult feature. The script contrasts an upbeat and semi comedic tone with sex scenes that are overly 'hands on' a bit rough and filled with aggressive word play.

The pacing moves at a clip, which is good because I feel this kind of setup very much has the risk of dragging. tonally its a unique mesh that I dont think will really be for everyone, but for anyone with a kink for 'soft' sub/dom dynamics. you'll probably get what you paid for with this one. I found the contrast of forcefulness and gentle humour to be a bit of an unusual mix, but not an unpalatable one. It makes the plot, which could have been very dry without those elements, come to life a bit more and feel altogether more stable.

The dialogues pretty solid, again, with these kind of films theres always a risk of the dialogue feeling a bit corny, and while I will say, some of the sex scene dialogue is a bit cringe at times, the actual plot dialogue is surprisingly well written and does have a bit of an acidic punch to boot! The characters all have very distinct personalities, goals and ambitions and the film does give them enough development to feel like theres a sense of growth across the runtime. ending things in a satisfying, but rather abrupt way.

The direction is about on the level, the non sex scenes are competent, feel solid and have a definite creative vision behind how they play out. This film came out at the back end of a bit of an era of change for the genre, and while quite a few movies of this time STILL clung onto the 'one very seedy looking room, with 2-3 very clearly ill looking people getting it on. Producers and studios were getting wise to the fact that the films where they portrayed good looking NON ill looking people in sunny PLEASENT locations…rather than just a motel room off i95 that was last renovated in 1952…was a more lucrative gambit.

To that end, the cine in this film is vibrant, is well lit, has complimenting colour grades and locations that feel fresh and open. the cast are all clearly being given solid direction on how the scenes are to play out and what marks to hit where, the sex scenes mix up initimate close up shots of the cast members really emoting, and broader scenes that help set the mood and tension. while the dialogue used throughout ranges from 'steamy' to 'cringe'. the cine is very much clued into the vibe of the sex scenes in question and never feels like it drops the ball really.

Sequences are well crafted, the scenes flow very nicely into one another, and this helps bolster the sturdy script into something much more robust in my opinion.

The casting is also relatively solid. While Shauna Grants 'Angela' is the 'In' to the world this film fleshes out, she is somewhat overshadowed almost immediately by several other larger than life performers such as Joanna Storm and Kimberley Carson as Tammy and Veronica, Herschel Savage as J.D, Antonio Crab as Animal…and in much more subtle (but effective) performance; Paul Thomas as Greg.

While the performances of the above are certainly entertaining and bombastic enough to keep viewers glued to their seats. It does come with the rather unfortunate side effect of the film feeling at times like the cast are fighting for the limelight, one upping each other time after time on who can give the biggest, most over the top turn. For my money, that title would go to Tara Aire as Carla, the jealous girlfriend of J.D who is literally only one click away from the kind of intensity 'Judy' from 'Sleepaway Camp' achieved. Shes manic, over the top and intensely campy. I thought she was great.

And as for the soundtrack? its nothing to write home about, but in an era where library tracks were still the common use of the day. This has some original compositions in there, adds mirth to the lighter tones of the film and is used effectively and consistently. I cant say its the best i've ever heard, but its far from the worst.

All in all? 'Summer Camp Girls' is a fine enough adult production. its tailored to audiences who prefer things a bit nastier and rougher, but dont want to go full 'whips and chains'. and it balances a lot of the contrasting tones and vibes within that well. I feel like this is a solid work, that; if your exploring the history of adult film is probably worth your time. While it doesnt do anything exceptionally well in my opinion. its a great example of the era and how the adult film industry was diversifying at that time.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/summer-camp-girls/

One that…the more I watched it, the more I felt i'd seen it before…But for the life of me I cant place where or when I might have seen it. 'The American Scream' is a 2012 documentary that explores the art of the 'Haunt'. The art of transforming an everyday street home into either a haunted house, or a haunted maze or some kind of spooky 'experience'.

The documentary explores what drives average people to get into the annual tradition of making their home a spooky trip, what drives the hobbiests and the professional 'Haunt Scene', as we follow three experienced 'Haunters' from Fairhaven NJ as they prepare for their annual halloween haunt experiences.

regular readers will know im not the best at talking through 'Documentary' as a genre. So I'll keep it fairly brief. I really personally enjoyed this documentary. I found its exploration of 'The Scene' to be insightful and engaging. I loved how the film went a bit more 'multi layer' in its exploration of the people who get into this field. But also into the families of these people, how supportive or helpful they can be to keeping the dream going. and I feel like the film is very sincere in its intentions of showing the craft, warts and all for what it is.

Visually its very well put together, it all flows together well both visually and narratively, and while it takes its subjects seriously, it is also not afraid to get a little bit of humor into the mix as a nice palette cleanse to some of the more serious moments.

'The American Scream' is a fantastic Halloween Pre-gamer documentary, something that really helps to get you in the mood for 'Spooky Season' and a really solid documentary in and of itself. One I can definitely recommend, its full of likeable and memorable people, doing something that they love, and the film presents that in a considered and entertaining way. Definitely one for you 'Watchlist' this Halloween.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-american-scream-2012/

I first heard about 'Big Shark' about 10 years ago when Tommy Weisau gave an interview while touring his (then) newest feature 'Best f(r)iends' in which he announced he was returning to film making with long time buddy under duress Gregg Sestero. With his next feature, inspired by 'Jaws', having the tentative title 'BIG SHARK MOVIE!'…A few years passed, and in 2019, a trailer for it landed and…it looked bizarre, strange and very *of* 'The Room' in nature. And sure enough, It seemed to depict Tommy, Gregg and a new guy getting into fights with their partners and fighting a GIANT shark that had seemingly invaded New Orleans. I was fairly excited…

Aaaand then 7-8 years passed, Covid happened, the film seemingly dissapeared, briefly reappearing in 2023/24 at a handful of US cinemas for premier screenings…Again, I didnt hear much about it…and then last night while flicking around on Tubi, I found out that it was seemingly just…dumped on there…Now titled simply 'Big Shark'. Without hesitation I cleared my diary, grabbed the popcorn and sat back to see what Tommy Weisaeu could do outside of modern takes on 'Tragedy'…and the answer is…'The hell if I know?!'.

The plot follows three firefighters (that element is set up VERY heavily…as if them being firefighters is going to be relevent to the story…it isnt…not really. Other than for one specific scene where the fire captain call the gang to warn them about a 'big shark' about 45 minutes in…) We're introduced to Patrick, Georgie and Tim. Three all american guys, saving lives, drinking beers and living life to the fullest with their foxy FOXY ladies…

But just beneath the surface, theres tension. Patrick and Tim are both struggling in their relationships, arguing with their partners…kind of…the film makes out that they're simultaineously in very secure happy relationships, but then, as is the case in 'The Room', an arguement between the couples will just…happen. out of nowhere…go on for about 2 minutes getting increasingly heated…and then abruptly stop for no reason either…Its weird…

Anyway! lifes a party for the boys, and the day after the night before, Patrick decides to take his partner Sophia out on the lake to go fishing. While out there, the couple have a heart to heart, argue, Patrick sees a 35 foot shark in the Mississippi river (the film doesnt show the shark at this point), his partner doesnt believe him, they argue, the arguement abruptly stops, and they go home with one fish thats big enough for 2-3 with the aim of feeding 6.

From there? The film just gets more and more disjointed and strange honestly…As Patrick, Tim and Georgie enter a cycle of talking various shades of bollocks about anything and everything that happens to be going on. theres idle footage of the group shopping, dancing in the street, drinking, driving around, sleeping, showering…But every so often the film will cut away to a MASSIVE shark destroying bridges, sliding down side streets eating people, or lunging about…And noone reacts to any of this, the news occasionally brings it up, but only in the same way they might bring up that days 'powerball' numbers…

Add to this, that through this, roughly 45-50 minute window, non of the gang acknowledge the shark problem…other than Patrick…who sheepishly will just occasioanlly drop a 'I saw a shark in the river y'know…' into the random conversations every 15 minutes or so…sometimes it gets acknowledged and dismissed a bit…sometimes it just gets completely ignored.

Anyway, around the hour mark, the sharks flooded so many parts of New Orleans, destroyed so many bridges and killed so many people, that the captain of the fire department 'Captain Joe' calls the gang to let them know a big shark is on the loose, and that the gang need to try and either track it down and get rid of it, or stay indoors.

The gang thank the captain for flagging it up…and then the remaining 35-45 minutes of the film is the gang just…doing more random bumbling about getting into WEIRD situations like pig chasing, and buying pulled pork sandwhiches. intercut every so often with them encountering the Big shark, not really being that scared of it…and occasionally getting the sentience to go 'OH MY GOD! BIG SHARK!' for about 20 seconds, until the scene cuts to the lads going for a run. Or having another beer.

Concluding with a 10 minute finale where Patrick and Tim decide to get serious on taking the shark out…or as serious as this film can get.

Somehow this is even more incoherent than 'The Room' at times, Big Shark kind of transends explanation, it has to be experienced almost to get a read on exactly what its putting out there.

The big elephant in the room is Gregg Sesteros involvement. According to Gregg, Tommy basically tricked him into performing in the initial 2019 trailer for this film by promising a leading role as 'Georgie'. Gregg accepted, and with it, also agreed to help co-write the movie. But then in 2020 Covid hit, Tommy told Gregg the production was 'paused' and then just…didnt get back to him. When he finally did come back a year or two later, Gregg had already firmed up his filming diary and couldnt take part in the film anymore…and sometime between then and the films release Gregg was written out of the movie and 90% of the co-writing he'd done for the film had been deleted…but not smoothed out.

I feel like that explains a lot of this movie, Because it feels pretty much from the off like there are a lot of scenes that happen, where there were scenes in between the scenes that made it into the movie that were just…removed in pre-production…but those scenes had essential context, that wernt carried over and back into the movie. For example, the opening scene is of the guys saving a family from a burning building. which then crossfades to reveal the footage we were seeing was in a movie theater where…SOMEONE (its not explained who) has decided to give the firemen all medals…According to Gregg Sestero, the reason its in a movie theater, who is giving them an award, and why was all in an additional scene that was cut and not elaborated on.

The bulk of the film is the guys goofing around, improvising in locations and presumably doing a lot of shooting at locations in exchange for promotion of goods and services. with NO mention of the shark for HUGE chunks of the runtime…and then it'll randomly just cut to the shark destroying things…NOONE other than Patrick really mentions the shark for the bulk of the film, noone is ever really panicked, or bothered…in fact, the shark can slide into the scene and kill 2-3 people, and everyone else will just kind of…barely acknowledge its there…as if a small bird had landed or something.

Obviously Gregg had to be recast because of the scheduling commitments, and thats a real shame as I think he'd have been great here. According to Gregg, the actor hired to play his part, 'Georgie' had a bit of a fraught relationship with Wisaeu during filming, and as such. Tommy took the opportunity to get rid of him as soon as possible…But that in turn meant EVEN MORE of the script had to be deleted with no detail carried over…meaning once Georgie exits the film, everything after that point becomes EVEN MORE incoherent, and the events leading up to his exist become EVEN MORE bizarre, disjointed and unrealistic.

I really cannot stress enough how, if it wasnt for a vague sense of sincerity in this production that makes me believe Wisaeu was really trying to make a kind of horror, action drama film as best as he could. I'd be convinced this was an Adult Swim funded production. And I think the thing that endears me to this film as much as it did endear me is the fact that, up until the closing 10 minutes or so. The film does seem genuine in its intentions, it doesnt feel like Tommy is making a self aware goofy comedy film. I dont know what he IS trying to make…but whatever it is, It feels like he actually believes in it.

So, the script itself? disjointed, feels almost dream like in places, has characters who feel like the actors are playing themselves (likely because they are) has terrible lumpy pacing, the three act structure is a monolith with a 10 minute epilogue tacked onto the end. the dialogue ranges from genuinely awful, to instantly quotable in a way that only Tommy Wiseaus movies really can be. a HUGE chunk of Patricks lines are just him doing improvised singing about cowboys and his girlfriend. The front half of the film uses the words 'Delusional Minds' about 200 times with a few variations as well. I dont know if Tommy just liked the idea of his character constantly being told he has a 'Delusional Mind' or is 'Delusional of the mind'…but he makes every character tell him that at least 2-5 times in the first hour.

Large swathes of context are just…missing from scene to scene, and we as the audience are just expected to go with it. Characters are introduced as being important to the plot who we meet once or twice and then never see again, they have no impact on the plot ultimately. Theres a ton of subplots that are introduced that Gregg has commented DID have payoff in the final act, but in the Wiseau cut are introduced with intent…for one scene…and then just forgotten or abandoned. The gang dont even directly confront the shark until the final 15 minutes, they have some distant encounters before that, but it doesnt lead anywhere.

A BIG recurring point made throughout the film is that the guys drink and drive…A LOT. to the point that, if you didnt know any better, you'd think the cast NEEDED to be drunk in order to drive.

To sum it up on a high level. It feels like an alien was given a box containing scripts of scenes from two totally different movies out of order, and was asked to just 'pick some scenes from both films' and, with no formal film writing or editing experience, the alien picked the scenes he liked and then they just…SLAMMED the scenes together into a 105 minute script…whether the scenes flowed into each other or not.

Which…to me? is the thing I both love and hate about this thing. its all over the place which makes it feel weird, uneven, messy…but also manic and a bit crazy. theres so much going on in the scenes that it may take multiple watches just to catch most of the weird background bits or small acting choices that are just…hilarious to me.

But at the same time. I hate that its the way it is because it gets SO convoluted So quickly…and its really hard to take a film to heart when a not insignificant chunk of it is three guys drinking beer, chatting inanely, intercut with Tommy screaming, crying, scream crying or singing.

Direction wise…its all very loose, I believe a lot of this was directed by Tommy by way of giving the actors a scenario and a rough script, and…if Tommy was In the scene, people could improv…if Tommy WASNT in the scene, they had to stick to the script rigidly. Tommy's directional style is fascinating to me, as he doesnt seem to know how to get people to give him genuine emotion…He only (understandably) seems to know how to get 'Tommy Emotion' out of people…its that strange quality that made all the performances in 'The Room' so etheral…and he's managed that again here…theres no big 'memeable' moments here really…but still plenty of times where you'll hear something thats instantly quotable, and will probably go down well with die hard Wisaeu heads.

Visually, its a somewhat polished, but still very messy film, the disjointed script means getting the visuals to flow was always going to be a big problem, and it just…doesnt really work in my opinion…

But visually from a cine standpoint, its a mixed bag. Not terrible, but a bit problematic. the actual quality of the images, the compositions, the style of filming, I thought was actually pretty nice. It looks and feels like a mid to upper mid budget production with the rule of threes and the line being followed (for the most part). shots are crisp, detailed, deep, and mix faded palettes with some richer colour moments well…However, on the other side of things, the CGI is pretty bad, we're talking worse than 'Asylum' level CG, the scaling of the 'Big Shark' changes constantly, theres a lot of CG just kind of…meaninglessly dropped into the background of shots, like CGI'ing a surrounding neighbourhood, or adding random trees to shots, fake blood and water splatters are low budget and badly utilised. its bad CG basically for the most part.

And making things worse, because of the disjointed scripting and direction, it makes editing this a nightmare. With sequences barely holding together for the most part and random cuts that sometimes cut a conversation mid flow, cut the sound off mid noise or cut to something completely different mid flow that is ALSO midway through playing out…its hard to explain, but like…they'll establish a bar scene where the gang are talking, Patrick will say something like 'Sophia is the love of my life, I want to marry her and spe-' at which point the film will cut to the big shark mid way through destroying 3-4 buildings, and just as its about to finish smashing through a 5th, it'll then abruptly cut AGAIN to the next day, with Georgie in the shower, and his dialogue will open with '-ly…tomorrow im going fishing.'

Its making a purse from a sows ear really. but those cuts are horrendous and absolutely knocked me for a loop honestly. when I say that i've seen no budget productions with a tighter, more consistent edit than this? Im really not kidding.

Performance wise? …well, as mentioned a big chunk of this film is improvised, with a not insignificant chunk of it just being Tommy singing made up songs with a voice that sounds like coal trapped under a door, repeatedly shouting things like 'NO FEAR!!!' over and over again, repeating lines over and over again and…when he's run out of steam and doesnt have anything else to give, he'll cheekily dust off a line from 'The Room', or one of his other shows/films with a nod and a wink to the camera in doing so.

Tommy is kind of the selling point of this film, and if you want more Tommy, this film wont dissapoint, the rest of the cast are a bit dry though in my opinion, they're doing the best they can, but some are better with Improv than others, its already a stressful situation having to work with Tommy anyway, so having to do that when he wants to go massively off script, or pull you in on a minutes notice to film a 10 minute dance scene with a New Orleans jazz band…I can imagine would throw anyone off their A-game.

Even with that considered though, the best performances are just kind of…passable, and the worst performances range from truly awful to cultishly appreciated. Noone here really stands out, because they're not allowed to stand out…Only Tommy is. and he's…well…Tommy.

And as for the soundtrack? Begrudgingly added apparently. As in, Gregg saw a cut of this film that was being prepped for release, and realised that the entire film had NO music at all…he flagged it up to Tommy who then took the film away, and when Gregg next saw it (at a premier) he'd added library tracks to the majority of scenes, added the improv footage of him singing random songs, and added a LOT of footage of him and the cast dancing with street bands…I cant imagine how truly hollow this film would have been with ZERO music. Because even with it, it feels a bit generic in places…wild.

Overall? I had mixed feelings on 'Big Shark' in some ways, its the perfect 'next step' if you watched and enjoyed 'The Room' because it feels bigger, grander and even more disjointed and strange…but at the same time, I dont think its as enjoyable as 'The Room' and I dont think it has the weight behind it that made 'The Room' the success it was.

To that end, I think if you are a fan of the strangeness of Tommy Wiseau, you'll MORE than get your hit here, its a largely sincere attempt to make a 'proper' movie. and its those kind of conditions that I find Wisaeu thrives in. Im less endeared to him when he's playing up to the cameras or TRYING to be purposfully wacky. I'd maybe even go as far as to say, if you enjoy 'bad' movies or cult films, you might get a kick out of this.

But is this movie as accessible to general film goers as 'The Room' was? No. its a bit *too* weird for general audiences in my opinion and I feel they would either not get it, or would just be annoyed by it.

So from me? I'll recommend it if your already into the alt cinema scene, or if you enjoyed 'The Room'…but I think if your not really into that kind of thing, you'll already know this probably isnt for you.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/big-shark/