TYTD Reviews

After the commercial success of the 1999 'Dark Castle' remake of 'The House on Haunted Hill' The company decided to go for broke and…rather than adapt my personal favourite of Castles works 'The Tingler', they instead went for a dark and gritty adaptation of one of Castles more gimmicky and whimsical entries 'Thirteen Ghosts'…here retitled 'Thir13en Ghosts' because thats what the 'youth' like isnt it? Text speak? yeah? the 'youth'? they like that stuff right? yeah…right?

Anyway; the film keeps the barest bones of the plot of the 1960 original, but because this film came out around the same time as 'Event Horizon' and 'Hellraiser: Inferno' everything is darker, more graphic, grittier and meaner. As the original was more a spectical adventure mystery as a family wandered around a small spooky mansion encountering whimsical chef ghosts and trying to solve the mystery of the manor. Here? the film opens with a group of 'researchers' trying to entrap a murderous junkyard ghost who's killed over 40 people (only 9 of which were killed when he was initially alive!)

The events of that night kill half a dozen people including the teams founder 'Cyrus Kriticos' the black sheep of his family, who's dedicated his life to studying (and attempting to capture) the paranormal like some kind of…goateed pokemon hunter.

Anyway, this sets in motion our main plot which concerns the *other* Kriticos family, led by Father 'Arthur' his daughter 'Kathy', son 'Bobby' and their nanny 'Maggie'. The family are in hard times, living out of a box apartment after a fire ripped through their family home tragically killing Arthurs wife. However, fortune smiles on the family seemingly when a lawyer arrives at the apartment with the last will and video testimony of Arthurs estranged uncle Cyrus. Who leaves his entire estate (including a luxury mansion) to Arthur as a means of helping him start a new life.

Arthur is VERY confused as to why this has all come up now. But his family push him to at least go and check the place out as its only a couple of hours away…So they go, and on arrival they feel uneasy as the 'mansion' is a huge glass complex with unintelligable words etched into every glass panel and seemingly endless hallways.

While exploring the place they end up bumping into a chap called 'Dennis Rafkin' who was friends with Cyrus and seemingly has some kind of psychic ability to see and contact the dead. The introductions however are cut short when Bobby accidentally sets in motion the events of the movie, as, on entering the house the Kriticos accidentally started an automated system, slowly releasing 12 ghosts that Cyrus had captured in the basement into the building and almost all of them have one mission, to make more ghosts.

SO! with Bobby missing in the mansion and all hell breaking loose in the basement, Dennis teams up with Arthur and the rest of the family to get to find Bobby, get to the bottom of the Kriticos mansion, discover its secrets, survive the ghosts, and to find out the secret of a rumoured '13th ghost' before they end up ghosts themselves!

And to say this film indulges in the excesses of 2000s horror would be a bit of an understatement. Its a messy, VERY flashy work thats there to dazzle first and deal with plot as an afterthought, and at the time…it probably won a few people over on that alone…However 25 years on its maybe not *quite* as sophisticated as it would like to think it is.

The plot itself is basically 'pulped' the core plot of 'People get trapped in a house and have to figure out its secrets to get out' is about as broad a narrative peg as it can be. The film clings to that for dear life as everything OUTSIDE of that remit is seizure inducingly flashed at the audience. Theres no time for tender moments, no time for character development, no time for act structuring or considered endings or plot twists that feel satisfying. Its just a group of people running away from ghosts, having a brief rest to dump lore and recover, and then its on to the next theme park ride.

Dont get me wrong, I like a bit of fast paced narrative development every now and then. But the thing to bear in mind if your going to do that is that it works best in bursts, married up to more engaging slower narrative elements. This films 'all gas, no breaks' from about 5 minutes in, and doesnt let up till the ending. making a frankly frazzling experience to have to sit through, ESPECIALLY when the film seems reluctant to give the audience anything meaningful to actually hang on to.

Tonally its messy, its core is to try and be as dark and violent as they could afford to be. But they throw in a couple of more whimsical moments that arent really blatent comedy, but also arnt really dont gel with the tone of the rest of the film. they also try to 'homage' some of the moments from the original 60s version but because of how dark it wants to try and be, it just doesnt quite land those moments effectively. Sometimes doing dark and gritty reboots of campy films from the 50s and 60s works well, as per 'The Blob' or 'The Thing'…But here? it feels like they overcompensated on the 'we need to be dark and EXTREME' 2000s cultural movement that was running rampant at the time, and lost their moorings on trying to make the basics work in an effective and engaging way.

The direction is distinct, definitely was the element of this that had the most thought put into it, but as mentioned is blindingly fast. everything is a flash cut, smash cut, swing cut. The film never stops for more than a minute, and as such the audience never get a chance to breath and take in what they're seeing. While I enjoyed the visuals and the styalisation chosen for this film, it smacks of a lack of confidence in the production that we get so little time to really take in what we're seeing.

This also impacts the edit, which is frankly, WAY too lively and messy. I can practically here some senior manager hovering over the editors shoulder going 'FASTER! MORE CUTS! MORE FLASHING!' its relentless and I found it quite annoying truthfully. Im sure theres the bones of a half decent ambient horror film in the rushes of this production. but the edit absolutely destroys it.

Performances are mixed too. Im usually quite a big fan of Matthew Lillard, but here it feels like the crew saw him in 'Scream' and just decided 'Okay, let him do that…but not evil' as such, while he's key to the story, he never feels in control of himself. his deliveries feel forced and a bit awkward, and thats largely down to the dire dialogue choices in this film that simultaineously feel very unhuman, and also very much like a sponsorship deal for how people in early 2000s movies talked. While he does have a good physical presence, I just wasnt entirely sold on him.

The rest of the cast are middling…F. Murray Abraham looks the part as 'Cyrus' but his deliveries just dont quite land for me. and thats a recurring problem for the rest of the cast who all look fine enough and do have a solid physical presence, but just lack the 'bite' or self awareness in their performances to really pull this thing into shape. And while the dialogue for this film is dire in places, I cant entirely blame it on why these performances are the way they are.

Soundtrack wise…its 2000s grunge rock pretty much throughout. the kind of thing that makes you feel nostalgic for the first 10 minutes, has you trying to tunnel out through your living room floor by the 30 minute mark and makes you want to never think about the early 2000s again by the hour mark. its almost non stop, its badly crashed into the edit. The end credits theme was so painfully 2000s and SO unrelated to the feature I'd just watched, that the tonal whiplash put me in a neck brace.

All in all? ehhhh…'Thir13en Ghosts' is VERY much a victim of its time. an aggressive, quirky and intense reimagining of a somewhat kooky and spooky 60s classic. I understand WHY they made it, I think theres fun to be had with this one…But its not my preference, I hadnt watched this in around 25 years, and revisiting it now reminded me why it had been a while.

Its a fine enough watch, and if your into youre late 90s, early 2000s horror, this is definitely a contender for a 'definitive' representation of the time. But I feel like this one will be the kind of movie I revisit every decade or two just to remember exactly what was 'off' with it.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/thir13en-ghosts/

After the thumping success of 'Return of the Living Dead' in all its gory, anarchic and acidic glory, a sequel was all but inevitable. But what do you do when your runaway success picture ends with the nuclear holocaust?! Well…you have 2 options realistically, Post apocalyptic zombies, or you hit the 'reset' button. 'Return of the Living Dead: Part 2' had a 50/50 chance of getting this right…and it wasnt even close.

SO! They went for the reset button…In a way that…well, its a unique twist on the method i'll give it that.

The film is set in an alternate reality from the original film, and a chunk of the details from the original film are pulled through into this story, but its like the chunks have been put into a smoothie maker. Whereas the original film dealt with a medical resourcing store where a vat of deadly 'Trioxin' had been secretly stored in the basement after it fell off a government wagon during a clean up operation to contain the events of 'Night of the Living Dead' Which is then hit and spills its gasses into the basement ressurecting cadavers and causing several people to become sick with a 'zombie' virus…leading to shenanigans and punk rock.

'Return of the Living Dead: Part 2' opens with the government shifting vats of 'Trioxin' (presumably after a big cleanup event) when one of the trucks hits a bump in the road, knocking a vat out of the back of the truck and down under a small bridge on the outskirts of town. Well; naturally a bunch of kids find it and on messing around with it, they reveal a fully sealed 'Tar man' preserved in the goo. They freak out and head into a local cemetary where familiar faces in the form of James Karen and Thom Matthews (previously Freddy and Frank in the original film) are back, here playing TOTALLY different characters Joey and Ed.

Instead of working in medical supplies, in this universe Joey and Ed are effectively 'grave robbers' stealing bones to sell on the black market for profit. However, when the kids are scared out of the grave yard by Joey and Ed, they head back to the vat to see whats going on with it, and accidentally release its entire contents of 'Trioxin' and a full size Tar man to boot!

The gas spreads through the cemetary ressurecting the dead, who this time are a LOT goofier and a LOT more talkative. Both the kids and Joey and Ed are naturally confused and terrified, and begin to formulate a plan to get to safety (bearing in mind at this point that Joey and Ed are once again infected with Trioxin…and once again will slowly begin to turn into the undead…these guys just cant catch a break.)

Anyway, the group manage to escape the graveyard and congregate in a place of safety where they meet up with one of the kids relatives. they all try to hunker down and survive the invasion, which doesnt work, and so they wind up at a hydroplant and…things get a bit zombie invasioney and…well…from there this is the only thing this movies really got, so I dont wanna spoil it…but its probably the best this movie gets realistically.

Out of the original 'Return' trilogy, I find for me that 'Part 2' is somewhat lacking…its the odd duck in between a cult classic directed by Dan O Bannon, and a cult classic directed by Brian Yuzna…and as such, it across the board just feels a bit 'vanilla'…its not the films fault specifically, indeed; had this just been a standalone zombie movie, i'd probably hold it in the same regard as 'The Video Dead' or 'The Dead Next Door' in terms of being solidly built…but when held up against arguably 2 of the better examples of the 'Zombie' genre? man this thing is wheat toast.

The plot lacks the bite and comedy of the original entry, instead falling back on more screwball and 'one liner' gags to try and pull things together…which makes it feel like it doesnt quite have the soul or intentions of the other entries. The pacings quite a bit slower than the other movies in the series, the characters dont feel as interesting or engaging, their motives and character arcs all feel a bit flat and futile…Theres just a sense of it feeling somewhat glossy eye'd. Its got the basics down pat, a clean 3 act structure, smooth transitions to guide the audience through those 3 acts, consistent tone, steady pacing…it does the basics…it just doesnt do them all that well in my opinion and it never really rises to do something a bit more unique or out there with its premise…which is a shame.

The direction too takes a massive hit, both the original and the next sequel in this series are heavily stylized, carefully thought through and curated viewing experiences that felt like they had something to say…Part 2 feels like director Ken Wiederhorn had seen dribs and drabs of the first film, was told to make a 'zombie film thats funny' and made just that. a zombie movie thats broadly funny, but overtly safe. Theres minimal guts, gore and ooze…the whole thing feels like it could have been a more mature 'Goosebumps' entry honestly, not helped by the fact that one of the main subplots of the film quite literally is a kid experiencing a zombie invasion while ALSO having to deal with his bullies! (being a kids tough amairight!?)

I'd say the film for about 75% of the runtime runs the gauntlet between being vaguely solid and eeking into a more creative space…and just…flat, lifeless, most basic of basic sequence structurings.

mercifully 25% of the feature (mainly in the 3rd act) DOES get a creative shot to the head, as things suddenly turn colourful, incredibly well composed and decently structured in a way that makes this film feel like its found its identity…about 80 minutes too late.

The cine is a mixture of bland and safe compositional shots that feel overly muted and honestly…deathly dull…with the occasional flash of distinct, colourful greatness. Which is a real shame. it never dips below the expectations in quality that I would assume to find in a studio picture. But it meanders in that middle ground of just being 'kinda sorta okay' for WAY longer than im comfortable with. The edit isnt half bad, though again, they dont really take any risks their either in terms of experimentation with transitions or cuts to make things look a bit jazzier…its just, the simplest thing they could do with the footage available.

The performances are a LOT more muted and a LOT less eccentric than the first and third films, theres still an element of 'wacky' thrown into the mix, because I think there'd have been rioting in the streets had they COMPLETELY defanged this thing. but again, the humour is coming from a place of broad 'KERRRAZY' humour…rather than the more pointed or darker humour the other films are known for…and as a result it makes a lot of the performances here feel a lot quieter, a lot less entertaining and a lot more 'basic' than i'd have liked. Ultimately, I didnt really care about any of these characters, and the performances seem to reflect the quality of the penmanship they recieved…

and the soundtracks a travesty. the punk rock jukebox is gone, and we have largely generic 'rocky' horror music and the occasional synth piece playing throughout. I understand if they wanted to make a break from the first film and try something different. But if they DID want to do that, then why did they bother bringing half the plot and a fifth of the original cast back in different configurations…dissapointed is an understatement.

In short? I dont much care for this one. I dont think its bad, I just think its overly generic. it doesnt really excel at anything, everything just kind of 'okay' and it misses a LOT more than it hits. Theres a reason the other entries get more plays out of me than this one, those films I can gladly sit and watch almost any time…this one? feels like the kind of movie I have on in the background when I just need something to fill in the silence while im sorting the dishwasher, or straightening up the living room. and the fact that im saying that about a 'Return of the living dead' movie, should tell you everything you need to know about the quality of this one.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/return-of-the-living-dead-part-ii/

The question 'Did we REALLY need this!?' almost always crops up in discourse around movie sequels. and pound for pound, I tend to find that more often than not, the folks who say stuff like that consistently dont fully understand that a sequel can exist simply to expand on the universe the original film created, and to give the audience the time to reconnect with much loved characters one more time. As a culture we dont need to be so militant about whether sequels should exist or not. For people who care, theres the option to explore the world of these characters and scenarios deeper…for those who dont…Well, as Jay Sherman so eloquently put it 'If the movie stinks, just dont go!'.

Im pretty liberal on sequels, I think if people want to see it, why not indulge them…That being said, as I got to the end of 'The Nun II', much like the characters in the movie, I found my belief in my own ethics and morals questioned violently.

What was the point of this movie? what does it REALLY add to this universe? a few flecks of explanation and clarification that could have just as easily been summed up in a post credit scene tacked on to ANY of the other conjuring movies would have sufficed…and yet here I am, an hour and 15 minutes short changed and very much less the wiser.

The plot of 'The Nun II' picks up about 4-5 years after the events of the first 'Nun' film. Father Burke is dead, Sister Irene has essentially gone into hiding in a convent in Italy to avoid being spotlit as having consumed the blood of Christ, and Frenchy is backpacking across Europe (as per the end of the last film).

However, news reaches the broader church that a tremendous evil that LOOKS like the events that occured during 'The Nun' are again happening across various locations in Europe. And so; Sister Irene is VERY reluctantly pulled out of servitude to the lord, to track down the evil using her special gifts, and hopefully to put it to rest once and for all.

Aided by nun in training 'Debra' the pair head to the last know instance of the evil, and quickly piece together that Frenchy is in fact carrying the last vestages of the Demon Nun within him, causing travesties whereever he goes…Something something 'ANOTHER hidden relic' something someting 'Big scary goat demon' something something 'the power of love'…THE NUN 2!

If I had to 'quick caption' this film, it felt like an 'OVA' to an already concluded series, that takes place somewhere in the middle of the pack. Im sure that if you choose to watch all the Conjuring movies in 'timeline' order, rather than 'release' order, and that you havent seen any of the other films before catching this one chronologically, you'll find it amusing and intreaguing…But at this point im 8 films deep into this series, I have 1 more entry to go, and the stakes with this film could not BE any lower if they tried.

For a starters, going in you already know which cast members survive, because the films made a point of showing you all of these details in the other 'Conjuring' films that take place after this one. Now…with prequels I always say 'its not the certainties, its the journey to the destination' thats the fun of them…But 'The Nun 2' doesnt really have a destination, the first film essentially made it clear what the end point of the events of these movies was building to…So this film feels less like an 'intreaguing' journey, and more like the first film ended…and the producers just forgot to yell 'cut' at some point.

The film HEAVILY meanders on the point of tracking down Frenchy, when we as the audience already know how his plot ends, the journey isnt investable because what do we gain from another outing where 'oooh! people might die!' except, they wont. because the first film made a point of saying they wont.

You might think, 'oh! well, at least the characters are engaging!' to which I say, 'Did you SEE 'The Nun'?!' NON of the cast are engaging, interesting or complex enough to hold my interest, non of them have anything really in the name of depth, or intreague…I dont really care what happens to these characters after this film…I barely cared what happened to the characters after the FIRST film definitively concluded things…so why would I want MORE of that?!

What we in essence have here is a pointless entry into the franchise, that retreads similar ground to the first 'Nun' film, just with a slightly larger remit of potentially impacted people, where we're relic hunting once again, and the CGI is being leaned on EVEN MORE to try and plug the gap in a plot that didnt need to happen, but is being willed into existence because Hollywood is on fire, doesnt know when to stop, and wont gamble on anything outside of the safest of safe bets when it comes to franchises.

I didnt hate this movie, I was bored by it. This could have been a short film to promote the next 'Conjuring' movie, and it probably would have been 10 times more impactful and a fraction of the cost of what this movie ACTUALLY cost. I wont spoil the full details of whats 'revealed' in this film, because I appreciate some folks WILL want to still check this one out. but i'd say for the time investment, the amount of detail this adds to the wider 'Conjuring' universe, you might as well just google it, you'll take back 90 minutes and a LOT of finger drumming waiting for it to be over.

The scripts overly generic, crawls at 100+ minutes, has uninteresting characters returning for no real reason, to do things that dont really matter, that benefit noone…I wish I could be nicer about this one, its not an unwatchable film. But if ever there was a film you could put on in the background, check in every 20 minutes and STILL know what was happening…its this one.

An overreliance on actual jumpscares undercuts the sinister nature of the first film, the largely stolen aesthetics of Italian horror and Giallo are gone…but replacing them is…well, basically nothing.

It being a studio picture, it meets its obligations on the barest of minimum levels, the direction is competent and nothing more, the cine is sturdy, but in the same way a shipping box is sturdy. it doesnt make it interesting, engaging or anything other than 'shot for function and form'. The soundtracks generic even for the Conjuring series, the cast give the barest of bare minimums because I believe even they were internally asking 'whats the point of this?'…

Its competent enough a work that I cant actively say I hated it, but it gives SO little, SO half heartedly that im just mistified in this day and age of financial hardship how something SO throwaway could have ever been greenlit. I cant even really say im glad I watched it truthfully. If it were on while I was doing other things, I wouldnt switch it off (which is more than I can say for 'Annabelle') But I absolutely cant recommend this, and the way the film is set up, it makes it one of the only entries in this franchise that you can easily skip and not miss a single thing in the broader picture that they've been painting since 2013.

GOD this film was dull. Avoid.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-nun-ii/

One that piqued my interest based on the premise and tagline alone. 'The Blackening' is a horror comedy with a fairly simple premise: Take an all black cast, lock them in the equivalent of a 'Saw' style trap and see what happens, because; as the tagline quips, they 'Cant all die first.'

As a result, the film is a mixture of self aware comedy highlighting black oppression and poking fun of how the media percieve black characters in horror films, while also presenting an actually quite compelling Slasher movie. Initially when I landed on this on Tubi, I was expecting something of the same vein and ilk as the 'Scary Movie' films…But having now seen it, I can say this is much MUCH more thoughtful and much more subtle than I had anticipated.

At this point i'd usually talk about the plot, but what I described in the opening of this review *IS* essentially the plot of the movie, a group of friends take some time to hang out in a log cabin style house in the woods, they find a boardgame called 'The Blackening' and that triggers a 'Saw' style fight to survive with the friends quipping and arguing about who is 'The blackest' while crossbow armed killers stalk the grounds and try to slowly pick them off.

The script itself is a little slowburn truthfully, but its a satisfying burn that delivers on the premise *IF* you go into this knowing that its not going to be an intense 'in your face' style slapstick comedy, and is in fact something a bit more thoughtful in what it wants to say. The pacing may be a bit on the slower side, but it eeks out a satisfying narrative and tone across the runtime that I thought was quite endearing honestly.

The dialogues a little mixed in terms of some rock solid one liners that made me gut laugh, through to some lines that felt a little thin on the ground. But its the topics the film deals with (such as how 'black' a bi-racial woman is vs how 'black' a guy who's parents were from south africa is) that fuel a lot of the humour and push the film along.

Tonally I think it gets the balance about right, leading with a horror edge, but contrasting at a 40/60 rate with largely intelligent humour aimed at making the audience think a bit beyond the usual slapstick. Can I say I laughed at every little thing the film threw at me? No. But I can say it kept my attention for the full runtime, and I did a few gut laughs along the way, which worked for me.

The film actually does a pretty good job of keeping the characters fairly shallow in terms of complexity and depth. But still managing to make them endearing and enjoyable to watch. I think its a good sign when I still care and am invested in the characters when the film doesnt really do a lot to bed them into having a history that extends beyond the titles and credits. So that definitely is working in its favour.

It has a fairly solid 3 act structure, seamless transitions between those 3 acts, the ending is pretty satisfying, and while there were no plot twists that made me double take, it was still fun seeing the twists unfold and how the characters reacted to them.

The direction and cine is relatively strong, given this was more of a 'mid budget' production, I think its definitely in the upper half of the bracket for creative quality, cinematography, sequence building and the edit was pretty rock solid too. Its nothing groundbreaking. But its a rock solid production that does take some risks here and there, that largely pays off what it tries to put in. So its a big win in my books.

The performances are fine as well, nothing incredible, maybe just a smidge too eager to lean into stereotyping for a quick laugh than I personally would have liked, but the cast deliver the lines almost word perfect, bring a good physicality to proceedings and made me laugh with reactions to scenarios and their joke pacing/deliveries. So I'll say they're a solid bunch honestly.

As for the soundtrack? while its nice to get away from ambient drone music thats plagued the horror genre now for over 15 years. The score for this is mainly rap and R&B tracks…which isnt entirely surprising. But at the same time I dont feel it always *quite* works with the narrative and edit thats being presented. there are moments where it feels a bit out of step with the action or story on screen, and i'd say it maybe hits about 30-40% of the time. It would have been nice to have seen the score editing be a bit tighter, as it does somewhat let the film down and gives it a vibe that more closely resembles a 'Straight to Tubi' film.

All in all? I was quite surprised by 'The Blackening' Is it one of the best horror films of 2022? No. but I was expecting a campy and tacky stereotypical, 'lowest common denominator' comedy horror film, and what I got was an actually pretty solidly made horror film with decent social commentary and some good laughs in there too. Put it this way, theres a sequel, and after seeing this im MORE than curious to go check that one out too. So I guess i'd say, if your curious, its more than worth checking out at least once. Will it change your life? No. But its definitely worth the price of admission, even if it is a 'one time watch.'

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

I've put off checking out 'Creepshow 2' for WAY too long…in part because for the longest time it was only available on VHS in the UK, and in part because it just never really worked its way to the top of my backlog…but tonight was the night I finally gave it a shot, and i'll be honest…I dont have a lot to say about it that I didnt cover when I originally wrote about 'Creepshow'.

I dont wanna be lazy about my thoughts on this one, but its kind of hard not to be…This has the same vibe and tone as the original 'Creepshow' with my only feedback being that I dont much care for the framing device (the original framing device was the audience flying through a comic book confiscated by a grounded boys father. This introduces a horror host called 'The Creep' who introduces each segment, and while the original was a mixture of live action and animation. These segments (barring and intro and outro) are almost exclusively animated.

I feel the framing device of the first one worked a lot better and wasnt as intrusive as the sequel. I didnt TOTALLY dislike the sequels framing. I just dont think it hangs as well.

I also didnt care much for 'The Raft' the other two stories are as enjoyable as the entries from the first film, but 'The Raft' specifically just felt a bit thin on the ground and didnt really offer much of a satisfying conclusion. it dragged and left me wishing they could have done something a bit more interesting with it.

My final critique is that across the board it just comes across as a bit cheaper on a technical level, theres less interesting cine choices such as adding in 'comic book' panel style framings. the lighting isnt as interesting or experimental, theres less colour gel work, the stories seem less experimental or 'out there'… I still enjoyed the film and as mentioned, its really not THAT different from the original in terms of quality and standards. I still wholeheartedly recommend checking it out, but you do need to prepare for the fact that this looks and feels like someone trying to make the 'original' creepshow on a lower budget, and that it doesnt quite flow as smoothly as the original either.

If you can get your head around that though, this ones great fun!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/creepshow-2/

One thats been on the backlog for a good while now, When Vinegar Syndrome announced a 4k release of 'Devil Times Five' I decided to take the plunge and finally pick it up…admittedly, its taken me a little while since its release to get to it…But thats by the by.

The plots relatively straightforward, a group of friends head up to a mountain retreat thats under heavy snowfall to iron out the details of the opening of a new Sanitarium. Theres some tension between the adults for various 'slights' and personality clashes thats just about managable given the distance and space of normal society, but in the cabin conditions, things become a bit pressurized.

Complicating and inflaming matters further however, a minibus containing 5 mentally ill murderous children is run off the road (under MYSTERIOUS circumstances that may have involved the murderous children being…murderous.) killing the driver and a nun who was acting as security. The children wander through the snow, eventually find the retreat, and…by playing dumb and pretending to just 'be kids' the adults willingly let them in, and try to reassure them help will be on the way.

And what follows is about 50 minutes of increasing tensions between the adults that bubble over due to cabin fever, with an added level of terror and fear as the adults all slowly start to get picked off one by one by the kids…in a film that I can only really suggest either features VERY stupid adults, or VERY clever kids…

I'll be honest, I was a bit disappointing by this one, after the initial pitch and some time on the backlog, I had high expectations, expecting something like 'Mikey' or 'The Children' in terms of consistant pacing and over the top kills. But the reality is, this is more of a slow burn psycho-drama with horror elements, which takes a good while to spin up, and once it does get going, does reward the viewer…But doesnt quite meet expectations.

The script itself has glimmers of good moments across the runtime, odd dialogue snatches, some of the kills are interesting, and the third act finally revs up to something a bit more in line with expectations. But that first act is PAINFULLY slow to get started, splutters into gear through most of the second act but is fighting to keep momentum till closing. The characters are all a little undercooked, and you REALLY have to suspend your disbelief for a big chunk of this in terms of the choices the characters make throughout this. Because if you apply logic for even a moment, you'll start tailspinning.

the pacing is lumpy, there isnt so much of an act structure present, the first act is pretty clean…but the 2nd and 3rd feel a bit homogenized. Tonally it feels like it wants to aim for something like 'Theater of Blood' in terms of being dark with a tongue in cheek element…but it doesnt quite nail the humour, nor does it really get dark enough. its campy on and off…but never quite feels consistent enough to nail it.

I would talk about the direction and cine here in depth, but being honest, the technical specifications for this film are problematic to say the least. Theres a few solid set pieces that do work in the films favour. But the edit is INCREDIBLY rough, theres an overreliance on slow motion or just…freezing the frame of the film for seconds at a time…for reasons that arnt fully explained. One kill is played entirely in slow motion and runs for at least 2-4 minutes…unbroken. Which is painful honestly to sit through.

Its definitely a distinct look and feel…but something can be 'distinct' and 'unique' and still be kind of rubbish…

As mentioned, the edit is hard work, cuts happen too soon or too late for most of the runtime, B-roll is just…tossed around, whether it makes sense or not. as mentioned the slow mo and freeze frame stuff is in abundence and really pulls the viewer out of the experience….its a frustrating piece. 'Distinct'…but frustrating.

Not helped either by a mixed ability cast thats split down the middle between blunt, campy and WAY too over the top…and not in a fun way, to just about okay…but a little dry. There isnt really any standout performances, nothing I can point to to say this is worth watching for this particularly scene/moment…its just middle of the road and backsliding from start to finish.

And the soundtrack, is basically one melody with about 7 varients, that plays almost on a loop for the full runtime. It works for the film and is somehow edited in better than the visuals. But its mind numbingly overused and will haunt me as an earworm for the rest of Halloween….

All in all, It didnt meet my expectations, thats not a bad thing inherently as there were moments that I thought were fun. But even so, there was a LOT of missed opportunities here. It really just wasnt for me ultimately…I think this could possibly pair as the 'lesser' film in a double feature with something like 'Sleepaway Camp'…But unless you REALLY dig your 'Killer Kids' movies…you probably can afford to give this one a miss.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/devil-times-five/

8 Years after the series commenced, and 5 years since the last mainline entry…and multiple MULTIPLE spin offs and sequels that were 'alright', but didnt properly cut the mustard for me personally. The series seems to return to some form of 'form' with 'The Conjuring 3: The Devil Made me Do It'. a film that actually surprised me that it was actually quite a bit better than i'd expected.

The film continues to follow the Warrens as the explore and document the occult and supernatural. Its 1981, and the film opens with them taking part in an exorcism of a little boy who is seemingly possessed by a demon. However; during the exorcism, Ed suffers a bad heart attack and the demon possessing the boy, seemingly jumps into the boys sisters boyfriend 'Arnie'.

Ed's rushed to the hospital, and everyone assumes, since things have stopped flying around and the kids alright, that the exorcism was a success. But a short time later, Arnie is picked up on the roadside covered in blood after murdering the owner of a local kennel. Though; its quite quickly apparent that the demon is FAR from exorcised, and that something MUCH more sinister is going on than just your bog standard possession.

With Ed on a strictly 'take it easy' instruction from the hospital, The Warrens are summoned to the prison, where Arnie explains that he believes the demon has possessed him and killed, asking Ed and Lorraine to help them prove that 'the Devil made him do it.' the court, solicitors and the police are MORE than skeptical. But Ed and Lorraine believe Arnies story, Putting the Warrens on an journey to trace how the demon possessed the family in the first place…and down an even darker pathway of satanic rituals, witchcraft and a direct attack on the Warrens that threatens to take the pair out for good.

And, this is probably the most solid work that 'The Conjuring' franchise has offered since its initial entry. I'll be honest, after 6 films of 'Ghost/demon possesses someone and everyone gets spooked for 2 hours' I was starting to get fatigued. By introducing cults, witchcraft and other forms of possession into the mix, and shifting the action away from a single entity possessing a household and terrorising a family, it gives this entry and great refresh to explore the characters and scenarios in a way that the series hasnt really done up until this point.

Across the board, I have very little to complain about, the pacing moves at a reasonable clip, the act structures are clearly in place and have seamless transitions to flow between them. the characters have a decent complexity and arc to help develop them, the script itself is largely serious but contrasts very dark moments with some genuinely funny edits and tonal changes that help create a sense of variety across the runtime. Which is something I can say this film does quite a bit better than the first entry.

There are a few moments where things slow down a little bit, but these are minor quibbles, and the film ends about as strongly as it could do given the plotting. All in all it feels like they really learned from their mistakes while making the spin offs and older sequels and really tried to bake in fixes that do help to keep the thing boiant.

Outside of that? the directions pretty solid, maybe not as adventurous as it could have been, but definitely a step up compared to all other previous entries. Its a studio picture, so the basics are a given, but here it really does try to create a stylish and engaging output that I felt was satisfying to watch.

Same goes for the cine, which is well composed, and looks equally stylish and brings a good creative flare to proceedings. the edit is razor sharp, and really elevates the footage to the next level. I feel had this bit just been 'Competent' the rest of the film would have badly suffered for it. But I have to say, I think this really is a solid piece of work, that definitely bumps things up in my opinion.

The performances are a bit of a mixed bag, the supporting cast I personally thought were a bit flat and didnt quite come across as believable. I would have liked to have seen a bit more depth. but it just never quite gets there for me. Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga are slowly on their was to flandarization as Ed and Lorraine Warren, but they are still the strongest performers, and get the widest range to work with in this, which they do very well. I feel here, their relationship is portrayed the most genuinely of the trilogy, after the first film felt a bit too 'hallmark-y' and the second one felt WAY too heavy on the 'WE LOVE EACH OTHER!!!' vibes. Here, it still gets a bit schmaltzy at times…but it feels more realistic, especially when dealing with Eds heart attack and the fallout that comes with that.

And the soundtrack? is the same as it always has been, ambient drone and spooky orchestral tracks intercut with jukebox hits of 1980/1981. Its a good mix and blend here that helps keep things interesting, well used for the most part, but still feeling a tad generic to me.

The 3rd 'Conjuring' film left me overall pleasently surprised. I liked the pivot away from the usual 'haunted house' efforts. and across the board it felt like improvements had been made to correct issues the franchise has been struggling with for years. However; while it IS a lot of big improvements across the board, some pacing issues, dialogue choices and performance choices did hold it back from being an out and out success for me. I still dont believe these films *need* to be 2 hours long. and had this one been 10-15 minutes shorter, i'd have probably been a LOT happier.

Nevertheless, I can happily recommend this one, whether you've seen any of the other 'Conjuring' films or otherwise…this is probably the best entry since the first one. and is the first one I can definitely say I'd want to watch again without being prompted to. So yeah! I'd say, check it out.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-conjuring-the-devil-made-me-do-it/

Do you like the works of 'Ed Wood'? Did you enjoy the movie 'Teaserama'? Are you opposed to 'The Amazing Criswell' channeling his performance from 'Plan 9 from Outer space' as he plays the prince of Darkness. An evil being who lusts for sins of the flesh, lest he destroy everything? Then buddy, have I got the movie for you.

An offering somewhere in the haze of Ed Woods 'post horror sci fi' days. But in the earliest days of his ventures into 'Adult' movies. We have 'Orgy of the Dead' a film written by Wood, but not directed by him (though, for how it looks and feels youd be forgiven for thinking he directed it) that quite literally is the answer to the question 'What id 'Teaserama' had Halloween themed DLC'

The plots paper thin. Featuring a young couple who are deeply in love, who crash their car off a cliff and wake up on a graveyard where Criswell and his bride in all things darkness. Are commanding a sensual burlesque show to appease the lord's of darkness.

Naturally the couple are quickly captured by the wolfman and a mummy, tied up, and are forced to watch these 'Lurid' acts, with a claim made on their souls if the dances fail to satisfy.

And what follows is basically 90 minites of Burlesque dancing featuring girls in skimpy halloween costumes. Intercut with occasional comedy from the wolfman or the mummy and occasional narrative points by Criswell.

Much like 'Teaserama' I cant say this is one id watch regularly. By the 15th minute of topless women doing VERY similar dance routines just in a slightly different skimpy costume, I found my attention waining. That being said, I think this offering *is* marginally more watchable than 'Teaserama' purely for the spooky 'plan 9' thematics, Criswell, and the fact the thing even HAS a wafer thin plot to begin with.

Its colourful, pops and has all the creaking charm youd expect from an Ed wood offering. Id definitely say its worth seeing at least once if your a fan of Woods horror and Sci fi work. But I think a lot of people will start drifting on this one fairly early on. Its cheesy goofy fun, but probably best enjoyed with a drink or three.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/orgy-of-the-dead/1/

I first caught 'The Cat' about 6 years ago when the wonderful folks over at 'Dead Formats' introduced me to it via a VCD copy of the film that had apparently been quite hard to come by. I was absolutely mesmerized by it, and was beyond dissapointed to hear (at the time) that it was very unlikely to ever get a legitimate western release…letalone a HD one. Skip forward 5 or so years though, and 88 Films COMPLETELY out of left field decides to just casually drop 'The Cat' on bluray in the UK, fully remastered with extras. It was basically a day 1 purchase for me. And while it has taken me a while to get around to rewatching it. I have to admit I loved it almost as much as I did the first time.

The film is set in the not too distant future of 1996 and predominantly follows 'Wisely' a journalist and paranormal investigator who also acts as our narrator for the film. who picks up on several bizarre thefts and murders in his local area and decides to investigate. it quickly becomes apparent that the thefts and murders are linked, but what Wisely doesnt know is that these are all of extra terrestrial origin!

We meet an alien princess and her defender named Errol who are both taking care of a supernatural cat with super-extraordinary powers and abilities. And while at first we're led to believe that they're up to no good. Its quickly revealed that they are in fact biding their time to take on ANOTHER alien species known as the 'Star Killers' that are essentially a kind 'Blob by way of 'The Thing' creature' thats able to ooze around and envelope humans essentially killing them and taking over their bodies in the process. When the princess and the cat steal an ancient artifact, Wisely begins to try and hunt them down. But when he finally DOES catch up to them, its revealed that the artifact may be the only thing thats able to save planet earth (and the galaxy even!) from total annihilation.

And ultimately; what I love about this film is the same thing that I love with 'House (Hasu)'…Which is that, on the surface this seems like a somewhat spooky science fiction action film. But every so often it takes THE most surreal left turns you'll ever see in your life. creating the kind of tonal whiplash that I seldom think many will experience in their lifetimes.

The pacing is positively ADHD driven, breakneck plotting with a clean and smooth 3 act transition. its a sloppy SLOPPY film, seemingly almost entirely running off of vibes and instinct. But that total chaos really helped to keep me engaged and on my toes for most of the runtime. While it doesnt always land the eccentricities perfectly, it has a bloody good hit rate, that caught me off guard the first time I Watched it, and continued to do so on the rewatch.

I think some of the dialogue is a little stiff and awkward at times, sometimes that works to the films favour in helping give the feature a more 'dream like' tone. but sometimes its just a bit creaky. the characters as well dont get a tremendous amount of depth and some of the scenes do drag a little past their strongest end point. But again, I dont so much mind that when the action is so breakneck you dont get TIME to wonder about the casts backstories.

Its really the 'vision' for this film that really takes it to the next level, absolutely bonkers levels of creativity are on display here with everything from puppets, to animatronics, to stop motion to guys in suits are utilized to the fullest. and combined with a VERY vivid and colourful colour palette, this is probably one of the wildest movies i've seen in a good while. the cinematography is sharp, crisp and B-roll is plentiful, leading to robust sequence building and a SUPER sharp edit that really appealed.

The visual effects are just delightful. and the cine is some of the most creative and interesting i've seen in a while. all in all, even if you dont care much for the plot of this one. its almost undenyable that this is a pretty good looking feature.

Add to that that the performances, while a little threadbare on detail are rock solid, and that the score is solidly memorable and probably one of my favorite Eastern horror soundtracks. and you've got a rock solid slice of fried gold on your hand. I wholeheartedly recommend you try and catch this this halloween season, its a trip and a half, and I really need to watch this WAY more than I have in the past.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-cat-1992/1/

As a fan of both Bill Rebane and Tiny Tim, I was MORE than piqued when I first found out about 'Blood Harvest'. An almost woozy, dreamy take on the horror film experience. And after waiting for the better part of 10 years to get a high quality copy of the film, I was a little underwhelmed. But! Its been at least 5-7 years since I last watched it, So tonight while on the road to Halloween, I thought i'd give it another spin.

The films about as straightforward as it comes, opening with a grizzly double suicide in a barn, followed by reports of murder/suicides in the surrounding area, before the film flashes forward and we're introduced to Jill. Jills a local to the area, but has been away for a few years studying. However; she's returned to her hometown with her partner 'Scott' to try and settle back in. And on returning she decides to drop by her childhood/teenage friends place to see how they're doing.

Jills friend is Gary, and; for a time, the pair were a little romantically involved. But nothing really ever got serious enough to go 'official' and then Jill left for her studies…and on returning Jill gets the fright of her life when standing in Garys kitchen, is a lumbering terrifying looking clown brandishing a bouqet of ruffled, hand picked flowers.

The clown, is 'Merv' (Tiny Tim) Garys brother who…at best is described as eccentric and at worst, mentally ill. Merv is a bit detached from reality, he was a bit quirky as a kid, and enjoyed largely talking to the animals on his parents farm. But when they were all slaughtered to bring money in to try and help keep the farm afloat. Something snapped in Merv and he slowly became more and more detached, and more and more into taking on the persona of a clown.

With the players all set in place, the film begins proper, and its basically a low budget slasher. with a mysterious killer appearing in town, having a VERY special interest in Jill and slowly but surely picking off all her friends and connections, with the ultimate goal being to 'get' Jill…The film HEAVILY implies that 'Merv' is the killer…but…it couldnt be Merv right?…right!?

What we have here is a CERTAINLY memorable, but not necessarily well made offering from Rebane, that mixes genuinely bizarre situations and choices with a LOT of padding, basic technical ability and a genuine struggle on line deliveries.

Tiny Tim is the only element here that elevates the script out of being THE most generic slasher movie of the 80s. And almost all of his moments in this film could be removed and it wouldnt make a lick of difference to the story or plot overall.

Tims sequences (with literally 1 or 2 exceptions) are largely isolated out of the main plot, and are the main reason to check this film out. He struggled badly with trying to remember lines, had to rely on cue cards and method acting when in his clown make up to make it through the scenes. and honestly, its a memorising performance that has to be SEEN to be believed. Dancing the line in places between something pseudo lynchian and horrendous. Its great!

The rest of the script though? well…its not the most inspiring slasher ever made, the pacing sluggishly pushes things along, there is a clean three act structure but its a bit heavy handed and doesnt quite flow naturalistically. The characters get a bit of backstory, but nothings seriously developed, the character arcs are all a bit shallow (with one or two exceptions) and the ending is 'shrug' worthy. Without Tiny Tim playing Merv. id have said this was a bore of a slasher film you could easily skip. But the deliveries he gives of the script combined with his improvisational moments really pull this production up to something that I still cant outright say is good, or even meets the basic brief of technical ability…But it IS fun in places and I cant deny that I enjoyed at least a good chunk of this one.

outside of that though? its generic across the board, Rebane as a director wasnt exactly known for being a polished creator or for pushing the medium into new places. He was a 'boxy' director who clunkily and painfully dragged his vision across the celluloid on multiple occasions. and 'Blood Harvest' is no different. we have a quite flat, low on flare, low on colour, low on finer detail and cast direction affair that feels blunt, aggressive in its minimalism and largely for function over form. This is not a pretty film, it communicates what it needs to, no more, no less.

The cine too is quite rough, compositions arnt always in focus, composed to the rule of thirds or following 'the line', sequences feel 'cleavered' together, and theres a burning sense that Rebane didnt have the time, budget or inclination for multiple takes. What was shot, was shot, and what was good enough got into the edit. In a way I admire that mentality of brutalism. But at the same time…it sits like sandpaper to any willing viewer.

Performance wise, Ive already sung the praises of Tiny Tim, who is just…SO bizarre and stilted in this thing, he's easily worth the price of admission and its clear to see why the branding reflects this. But credit I feel also has to go to Itonia Salchek as Jill. While the rest of the cast have very narrow tunnels to work with in terms of bringing their characters to life and defining their performances. Salchek gets a VERY meaty turn here with a good range of emotions to work with, a chunky set of dialogue and she relishes the chance to bring some real physicality to the role that the rest of the cast seem to have all but given up on (apart from Tiny.) Shes fantastic here and easily has some of the 'other' best moments of this film.

And as for the soundtrack…its synthy gubbins, but I liked it! and if you needed selling on it, check out the 'end credits' theme tune sung by Tiny himself! its a real trip!

''Blood Harvest' isnt a particularly well made film, its saggy, draggy and VERY rough around the edges. But it also has a cultish charm that I really appreciated. This absolutely wont be everyones cup of tea, Im not even 100% sure I can actively recommend it. But I can say that, for the most part, while I cant commend it for its quality. I did enjoy it, and I sat through the whole thing waiting for the next oddity to pop up.

So…my advice, if you have the patience for the more generic elements of this movie, and want to see Tiny Tim get PARTICULARLY weird…this may well be the movie for you!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/blood-harvest/1/