TYTD Reviews

For the longest time, ‘Home Alone 3’ was my favourite ‘Home Alone’ movie…I realise that may raise the blood pressure of some readers, but I have no regrets about this decision. I was younger, less film literate and loved a good ‘Hit in the Butt/Crotch’ joke as much as the next person.

As with the first two films, it has to have been AT LEAST 15 years since I last saw this one, and…as I continue to get older, my enthsiasm for this entry *is* starting to cool a little. I dont think its *quite* as good as the first two films…But it definitely has a lot going in it’s favour!

Starting with the plot! Which actually breaks with tradition (with the first being a straight ‘burglars V kid’ home invasion pic, and the 2nd basically being a higher budgeted, more polished run through of the 1st again) Here? We’re introduce to ‘Alex’ a new kid and a bit of a tech whizz.

Alex is the youngest child of 3 in a family household that seemingly never stops. His mum and dad work full time and his siblings are all of school age and have their various ‘things’ going on. When Alex comes down with a case of Chicken Pox, his family find enough time to make him comfortable, but arnt able to stay with him through the day to ensure his recovery…So! they set him up a TV in his bedroom, and a contact list of who to call in case of an emergency…Only this time, he may need a better contact than the little old lady across the street!

As a group of hired agents are put on a job by the korean mafia to steal a US Airforce computer chip that could put the Koreans ahead in an arms race. They’ve hidden the chip in a remote control car, only…At the airport theres a mix up at baggage and Alex’s neighbour ends up taking the car home instead of her luggage. She gifts the car to Alex in exchange for an *attempt* at clearing out a driveway…the agents figure this out and start systematically working through the neighbourhood houses looking for the car…And Alex clocks on to this at the EXACT same time that the agents realise which house its in…Hilariaty and slapstick shenanigans unfold.

And honestly? Im a bit confused as to exactly what fans of ‘Home Alone’ really wanted from the franchise after ‘Lost in New York’ Leaving ‘Kevin’ at home once was bad, twice was awful. They couldnt have done it a 3rd time without it being an outright parody of itself (something ‘Lost in New York’ came dangerously close to at times) Equally; just doing ‘burglars’ again after the last 2 films both did burglars…and did them so well!..well; It’d be setting itself up for a direct comparison right out of the gate for sure!

So! they shook things up a bit, hired agents on a mission is a bit of a stretch on reality admittedly…But not a completely unreasonable one, I actually really appreciated that they took the story in a bit of a different direction for most of the runtime because I think it would have been flogging a dead horse to rerun it all again.

The script’s pretty tight, at an hour and 42 minutes long it’s maybe a *smidge* longer than I would have liked…But feels pretty nippy all the same, the tone here is now basically a ‘Family comedy’ which I DO feel is probably this films biggest issue. It’s written by John Hughes…and I can ABSOLUTELY see moments in this where, had Hughes directed it too, it would have had that schmaltzy heartwarming goodness that the first two had. But here, thats played down in favour of a stronger comedy element and a heavier emphasis on the period this film was made (the late 90s were ‘radical’…’dude.’)

In a way, im glad they picked a lane, because juggling the two, in the past, has kind of made it a bit harder to really clarify what the film is trying to be….But at the same time, I cant deny that the usual Hughes ‘heart’ just wasnt in this one…or at least wasnt as strongly imprinted as with his previous work.

The characters too are a little bit of a mixed bag, I actually prefer ‘Alex’ as a character over ‘Kevin’, in the first film I found ‘Kevin’ to be a bit one note, he sort of…swung between being a border obnoxious kid and being sad…in the second film he’s basically all overly polished charisma and very little else…’Alex’ by contrast feels like a kid, he feels like a complex character who gets a good range of emotions to work through across the films runtime as he tries to warn the grown ups about the incoming danger. Then takes matters into his own hands when they ignore him. ‘Alex’ feels like a kid in control of the narrative and I saw the appeal in placing the kid as the story maker both as a kid and even now. While this film may be missing the ‘Hughes’ heart, it does pull a lot of that energy back into the frame with ‘Alex’ as a character.

The other characters however…are all about on the same par as ‘Harry and Marv’ were in the originals…just less charismatic. Which sounds like a problem at first…But actually isnt terrible. they’re all a bit one note, most of them seem annoyed by Alex simply existing…But non of them are irritating and most of them (across the runtime) do get a bit of a character arc to work with which is nice.

Of course, one of the main reasons to watch a ‘Home Alone’ movie is the booby traps that litter the 3rd act. Its a bit of a come down after ‘Lost in New York’ (a film in which Kevin pretty much obliterates a 3-4 story New York town house) But quality wise? I’d actually put the traps ahead of ‘Home Alone’ in terms of quality. With the ‘Fake Swimming Pool’ and the ‘mega blocks roller skates’ being two of my favourites.

What is a bit dissapointing however is they do repeat a few jokes (the electrocution gags are basically the same from ‘Lost in New York’ and the scene where a guy gets hit in the crotch because theres a mouse there is basically Marv with the tarantula from the original) and there are a couple that DO fall a little flat for me personally…But I’d definitely say theres more hit than miss here for me.

The directions pretty nice, again I kind of wish Hughes had picked this one up, just to help it keep in line with the other two films. But Raja Gosnell does a fine enough job here, Stepping up from Editing ‘Home Alone 2’ to full on directing this one (this was their first directing credit, and they’d go on to direct ‘Big Mamas House’ and the two live action ‘Scooby Doo’ movies)

Its a solid creative base, it maybe lacks the flare that Hughes could have brought to the production, and its a little slower paced than I’d have liked personally. But, its clear, compitent, it has moments where it really shines. Direction of the cast too is, actually in my opinion, stronger than the first two home alone films. I think the cast are stronger actors (Burglars aside) and to me, it feels like a lot of clear communication was had on set as to exactly what was needed from them.

The cines fine enough too…it’s a studio pic, so at minimum everythings going to be shot relatively coherently, and edited fairly tightly. I absolutely feel they could have done more to give this film a bit more personality, especially compared to previous entries. But whats here is more than fine enough and it has quite a few iconic moments to boot!

The edits tight, with well crafted sequences that use a decent amout of Broll and do get to experiement here and there. I do feel one more pass through just to get it under an hour and 40 probably would have *just* pushed it a little bit higher quality wise for me…But thats a nitpick honestly.

Cast wise, while I wont comment on the child actors, I thought the agents were all decently charismatic, with a great physical presence that managed to raise at least a couple laughs on that alone, the rest of the cast are naturalistic, fluid with their line deliveries and blend into the comedy elements almost seamlessly, which was really a delight to see.

‘Home Alone 3’ absolutely isnt as iconic as the first 2 films, a drop in budget and Hugheses departure from the directing chair has left a noticeable change on the franchise. But just because something isnt ‘iconic’ doesnt mean it cant be ‘good’ or ‘enjoyable’ and I really quite enjoyed ‘Home Alone 3’ It has a charm and tone that appeal in different ways than the first 2 movies, it looks good, sounds good and plays out about as well as a film 3 entries into a series could play out. I never really got the hate for this one honestly. That being said, this is probably about as far into the ‘Home Alone’ films as i’d be willing to go, as having seen ‘Home Alone 4’ many MANY years ago. It was a viewing experience I wouldnt wanna repeat. Stick with the first 3 though, and you cant go far wrong!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/home-alone-3/

Watched on Thursday December 21, 2023.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/santa-claws/1/

Watched on Thursday December 21, 2023.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/dont-open-till-christmas/1/

A sequel that didnt *really* need to exist, but im kind of glad it does, ‘Jack Frost 2’ sees us once again returning to the mahem of a mutated snowman melded with the DNA of a vicious serial killer…Only this time? We’re going tropical BAY-BEEEEE!!!

Yes, its 12 months on from the last film, and this time some of the folks from the first entry have decided to get out of town for christmas to try and put the events of 12 months prior behind them. However, around the same time a group of mad scientists find Jacks body trapped in a bottle of antifreeze and release him! Leading to the killer snowman (and later some of his offspring) to travel to the luxury hotel to take chilly vengence…Only now; Jack has the edge as he’s immune to Antifreeze!

And, in someways this is a step back…In others, its kind of a step forward. The most noticable difference between this and the last film is this has been shot on early 2000’s high(er) end digi beta (or some varient therein thereof) yes…this is essentially an SOV movie for all intents and purposes. Which DOES feel like a bit of a step back after the previous films ‘All film’ basis…but at the same time, it kind of suits this movie to go that route anyway…

The last film juggled serious horror and some heavier moments of comedy; this? is basically the flip opposite, a comedy movie with Horror elements. Which, again; I think suits the film better than it being the other way around.

The tone of the script as a result is much lighter, much more engaging and the pacing is fairly breakneck. However that does then remove more spooky elements that the horror had previously supplied.

The characters also feel a little one note here, they’re leaning into the comedy…But not in a ‘laughing with them’ way…which does make this thing feel a little cringey in places…It should also be noted that ‘Jack’ as a physical entity…isnt in this thing a whole lot, in fact he’s pretty much MIA until the 3rd act of the film, existing only in V/O form up until that point. In his place? we have some adoreable little murderous snow babies…which sometimes are shown via GENUINELY adoreable little puppets…and then much less adoreable as ultra basic early 3d CGI…which has not aged all that well…especially when its shown on tape.

the direction and cine seems a lot less styalized here vs the original, but does have a bit of a charm of its own, im quite glad they swapped stylization out for enhanced colour as this really is a genuinely quite vivid film for the most part, which is really nice.

The performances range from cheesy to cringey, but again kind of suit the tone…Even if they dont ENTIRELY carry the same vibe as the first one did, and the soundtracks a little bit on the irritating side as it all sounds a little bit samey and I get the feeling they managed to wangle 1 or 2 copyrighted songs (as re-records) for this thing, as they get ploughed into eternity the amount of replays they get in this thing.

Honestly? by around the half way point I realised EXACTLY what film this reminded me of. It reminded me of ‘The Gingerdead Man’…only, this one came first and is SIGNIFICANTLY better than that…but it has similar plot beats, a similar vibe and tone it probably has a bit of ‘Gingerdead man 2’s ‘ DNA in it as well for the weird and slightly meta humour. So…I guess that would be my steerage for you guys…if you’ve seen any of the ‘Gingerdead man’ movies and thought ‘I like the idea, but its a shame about the execution’ give ‘Jack Frost 2’ a try…as its *LIKE* those films, but with a much tidier execution.

As it stands, I could easily see this one going into regular christmas rotation!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/jack-frost-2-the-revenge-of-the-mutant-killer-snowman/

A first time watching this today and honestly, its pretty damn near perfect. The makers of this film basically went through the phone book and called ever vaudville or animated comedian from 1932 to the (then) present day and asked if they were available and…for the majority, the answer was seemingly ‘yes.’

It’s a screwball caper involving a group of folks trying to find a stash of 350k buried under a giant ‘W’ and the adventures and mishaps they get up to on the way. And honestly; thats all you really need to know.

The scripts PERFECTLY balanced keeping a consistant pace, running the three acts as a slowboil on plot and a quick boil on character pieces, The tone is near perfect for the full runtime, the dialogue is ripped straight out of the world of fast talking, charismatic vaudville and music hall stylee. Though; this film explores the full buffet of comedy stylings of the time, so expect slapstick, witty wordplay, physical comedy, visual gags. The LOT.

It never feels slow, it never slows down, this isnt about the race, its about the journey the folks go on while ON the race. and most importantly of all; IT STICKS THE LANDING! Which is CRUCIAL to the success of a movie like this.

The direction is decently styalised, broadly speaking its nothing overly complicated, but the set pieces are grand and astounding, intricate and complex. Its a film that feels confident in what it wants to do, and how it wants to do it. SO confident in fact; that its more than happy to let the script and cast do the talking, only pulling out the ‘Big Guns’ when IT wants to, rather than when the execs say it should.

The cine is colourful, vibrant, superb composition, its a frame PERFECT edit for the most part with impeccable comedic timing across the full runtime.

Even if the script, the comedy, the style, the direction, the cine and the editing wernt your cup of tea. The performances will almost certainly win you over, with sincere and lively takes from some of hollywoods best and brightest for the time. They’re quick, hot on the dialogue delivery and most importantly of all seem MORE than happy to be involved in this thing. And thats not even MENTIONING the cameos…Put it this way, when a ‘blink and you’ll miss it’ cameo from Jerry Lewis…or ‘The Three Stooges’ can be SO impeccably timed as to raise the roof, the rest of the cast aint got nothing to worry about.

All this scored with a dizzying and playful score thats as unique as the movie itself. honestly? im kind of sad at the fact this things over 2 and a half hours long…As it means finding time to rewatch it is going to be quite difficult. It absolutely doesnt FEEL over 2 Hours and 40 minutes long…but surprisingly it is!

They say that familiarity with a work, brings comfort and nostalgia, but I had NO trouble slipping into the weird and wild world this film creates. I was INSTANTLY comfy (despite having never seen it before) and as the credits rolled, my only real thought was ‘Damn…I wish I had time to just hit ‘play’ again on this right now!’

If you have a taste for older comedy stylings and in particular screwball comedies. This ones an absolute must. its a near perfect comedy in my eyes. and MORE than worth your time.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/its-a-mad-mad-mad-mad-world/

First time catching ‘Elf’ This year, how I hadnt seen it up to this point? *Shrugs and gestures wildly around at the state of things* but…it is what it is.

A simple enough story, a baby accidentally taken by Santa one year while on the usual christmas rounds is kept at the North Pole and raised to be an Elf by the other Elves…But he kind of sucks at being an Elf, so decides to try and track down his family who live in New York city. ‘Buddy’s’ mother passed away some time ago and his fathers on the ‘Naughty List’ as a corner cutting book publisher who’s a scrooge in every sense of the word.

As you can imagine the naive Buddy tracking him down leads to all manner of funny happenings and events. While Buddy along the way learns about ‘human’ ways of living and tries to raise the spirits of his step brother, whos a preteen going into his angst phase, the workers at a local toystore with whome he begins to slowly fall in love with one of the staff by the name of ‘Jovie’

In short? I kinda liked this one. Its gentle, it isnt exactly a stretch for Will Ferrell (who really isnt helping his case here that he only really has 2 character types)…Admittedly he plays the character well…but yeh.

The plot is a pretty basic clean cut ‘raise the holiday spirits’ picture, and I think it succeeds in that, the tone is silly, gross out, but well intentioned and the characters while a little one note, do eventually have a bit more complexity that ultimately won me over.

Running against it however, some of the humour is low standard, even by christmas movie levels. and im kind of on the fence about the ‘autism’ coding in this thing…I dont think they set out to be malicious by any stretch. But given that very serious conversations are still being had/debated about the infantalisation of autistic people in media…I dont think this is a particularly ‘glowing’ representation…and the people who’ve used the arguements of ‘BUDDY’S FROM A DIFFERENT CULTURE! HE’S NOT AUTISTIC, ITS JUST HOW HE IS!’ or ‘BUDDY IS A POSITIVE ROLE MODEL! SO WHATS THE PROBLEM!?’ to me? sound like the same folks who would say that ‘Lolicon’ is okay in some cases because; ‘she’s a 4500 year old witch who just so HAPPENS to look like a 6 year old kid! SO ITS FINE!’ Ugh…I just feel this may be a growing sticking point for some as neurodiversity becomes a more prominent societal conversation…

I also think it kind of loses a bit of steam around the end of the 2nd act, heading into the 3rd. The first 2 acts had a solid narrative arc of Buddy being established alongside the Elves and Buddies adventures in New York, eventually finding his father and sowing the seeds of change with his rambunctious runaround antics. But around the time Buddy decides he just isnt fit for the ‘human world’ the humour and pacing slows right right down as I think the scriptwriters realised they handt *properly* set up a redemption and recovery arc for Buddy and that, his Dad just accepting him for who he is out of the blue, wouldnt be a particularly engaging way to end the film.

So they kind of cobble together some ‘Christmas Spirit’ malarkey on the fly as a mini problem to give Buddy that redemption AND to make his Dad realise his son isnt completely useless…but they dont really tie that off properly? They just sort of jump cut to an undisclosed point in the future where everythings now working perfectly fine. Its like the film spent an hour making an intricate hot fudge sundae, then in the last 20 minutes it scrapped it in favour of a push pop, but then dangled a photograph of the finished sundae in our faces while telling us how good it is…I dunno…for some people that ending may have been enough, I felt it was a bit too flakey.

Those aside. I think the jokes are kind of mid, but there were a few laugh out loud moments to be had, I really loved the directional choices here (the decision to mix live action with Rankin/Bass-esq stop motion animation for some characters and set dressing in the North Pole segments were delightful) its a very festive looking and feeling movie (New York is astoundingly christmassy to me)

The cine is decent enough, though maybe a little basic once the action shifts to New York. The scoring seems to basically be jukebox hits intermixed with a Jim Reeves ‘Public domain friendly’ remix of ‘Magic moments’ The cast do the job jsut about…this is…fine. I can absolutely see why kids love this, I can equally see why grown ups think this is a welcome ‘Christmas movie classic’ hell…I’ll happily watch it again in future. its fun. But its not perfect, and those problems are ultimately what hamstrung it a bit for me.

Put it this way, im glad I finally got around to checking it out, but if it vanished tomorrow completely, I wouldnt miss it.

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

‘Home Alone 2: Lost in New York’ is in many ways everything you could really want from a sequel. Trading the smaller scale ‘Comfiness’ of the original, for an all together grander experience across the board. As we move from a family friendly and border cartoonish take on the ‘Home Invasion’ genre, with a festive twist. To tales of grand GRAND robbery in the big city itself.

The script gets an extra layer of glossy polish over the original, John Hughes is probably best known for his more ‘personal’ style of writing, tugging at the heartstrings while not being afraid to marry the bittersweet to full on belly laugh comedy. Here? while we DO lose some of that more heartwarming family…ness (for lack of a better word) we instead trade that in for a more slowburn chased comedy in which Kevin has to first of all duck and dive the suspicions of the hotel staff who believe he’s staying there via an illegal credit card. THEN he has to duck and dive the return of Harry and Marv who’ve moved to the big city to try and ‘Go Big’ after a short lived run of house raidings.

Compared to the original? I feel this one uses its time more wisely and manages to keep a consistent pace and tone right across the 3 acts, it rarely feels like it slows down, and even when it does, its usually as a means to ramp up for an increase in pace. One of my main criticisms of the first film was that, clocking in at approx: 1hr and 45 mins, it didnt seem to know what to do with itself in the middle of the film, so it re-ran scenes of the ‘wet bandits’ investigating the houses on the estate and padded the runtime with Kevin grocery shopping or running around in a park. I felt it could have easily lost 15-25 minutes and been just as strong, if not stronger.

‘Lost in New York’? is 2 hours long…And to its credit, it doesnt FEEL 2 hours long…but even so, at 2 hours I find myself really struggling to be able to find the time to work through this one again anytime soon. It definitely could have lose *at least* 10 minutes with nothing of value removed. But I do have to say, it feels like a much more comfortable 2 hours, than the original did at 1:45. it wears its time better and I think giving over nearly 40 JAM PACKED minutes to the bad guys going through the gauntlet again, was absolutely a much wanted reward after an hour+ of slowly building to it.

My other major criticism with the first was that, while the characters did have a *little* bit of depth, I would have personally liked to see them have just a bit more going on…other than Kevin bouncing between ‘rambunctious kid’ and ‘Sad child missing his family’ and the buglars feeling like they had no other depth beyond ‘bumbling theives’

Well; While I wont say I was *completely* won over by them on this outing either, its definitely a step in the right direction, Because the script trades out the more schmaltzy ‘I miss my family’ angle in exchange for a less grounded, more cartoony worldview, it means they’re able to develop the characters into almost charactures of what they were in the first film, Kevin is now a charismatic charmer, the burglars are now LITERAL grumbling idiots who almost on purpose walk into the traps.

Some would say this was regressive, but honestly? I’d rather Hughes pick an emotional lane and explore it, than flip flop between the two and deliver a somewhat shallow experience.

The direction and cine also get a HUGE boost in quality. we have a much more polished and styalized production that really leans into the city as a source of filming inspiration, expect all the major landmarks to make very welcome cameos that look astounding, and even a few celebrity cameos.

Chris Columbus really gets to flex here, after some stunning work in making an ultra christmassy and quaint first offering, here, he’s really let off the leash and you really feel the full size and scale of New York from a kids perspective for pretty much the whole runtime.

To this day, I’ll argue his work around the choreography of shot arrangements for Harry and Marvs pratfalls are some of the most satisfying and painful looking *THUDS* in film history, you REALLY feel the weight of watching the pair fall 2-3 floors onto concrete. Its very impressive.

Composition is rock solid, they done some really nice cool grading on this one, the editing is razor…as I’ve mentioned previously, this took the foundations of the original and MASSIVELY upgraded almost every aspect on an almost microscopic level.

The performances I think are less realistic, but more polished across the board. I’d rather an exaggerated performance in a christmas film, than a muted one that doesnt let the cast shine. And here it really does feel like they were allowed to explore the roles a bit more, with largely positive experiences i’d say.

John Williams is back on scoring duties alongside the likes of Tom Petty and Darlene Love. I love this take on the scoring over the original. Taking the original compositions and reworking them/remixing them into something that again; just feels grander, more intense and is MUCH better utilized across the runtime. I think its great and really helps raise the film to the next level!

All in all? am I annoyed this things 2 hours long? absolutely; its the only thing that really stops it getting the full marks from me. with a shorter runtime this would’ve been the perfect christmas film to chase away the blues. As it stands? this is a BIG improvement over the original on almost every area…like I say; I just wish it was shorter and that they’d maybe leaned even further into the comedic aspect, as I feel Hughes and comedy go together like chocolate and peanut butter.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/home-alone-2-lost-in-new-york/

A christmas staple for most, it’s been *AT LEAST* 15 years since I last watched home alone, and I couldnt quite remember why I ever stopped having it in my christmas movie rotation. Its a John Hughes pic from his near perfect run of 1983 – 1993, Its got a star studded cast with the likes of Joe pesci and John Candy…Not to mention Makauley Culkin here in a fairly early role that would cement his status as a lovable child actor of the 90s.

And yet; rewatching this year after a long absence…while I absolutely appreciate it for what it is and can EASILY see why people watch this one year on year. I didnt quite click with it in the same way that I do for other festive themed works from Hughes like ‘Planes, Trains and Automobiles’ or ‘National Lampoons Christmas Vacation’

The script is pretty rock solid, its got a nice 3 act structure that nicely mingles the festive, with light comedy, slapstick and it isnt afraid to get a little bittersweet in places. it balances all the elements out nicely and delivers the perfect ‘holiday cheer’ boost that a lot of the christmas movies seem to fumble a bit. Its great!.. That being said…

Two things stop me from outright loving it, one being that our characters, for the most part are a little flat in terms of character depth. with Harry and Marv (our bumbling burglars for this picture) being a little one note and blunt. im not saying that had to be complex characters for me to get on with them, but maybe just SOMETHING a little more than ‘they’re dumb burglars’ probably would have made me feel a bit more involved…Kevin as a character has a bit more nuance, but by the middle of the 2nd act this has basically boiled down to ‘rambunctious kid’ or ‘I miss my family’ sadness. and theres no middle ground really, he’s in one mode or the other till the end.

The rest of the family feel more real by comparison, but also are on screen less and dont quite feel like they fit into the rest of the story. It sticks the landing ultimately…but I just wish there was a bit more going on to really truely keep me glued to the screen…

And the other problem, is length. This things 15 minutes short of 2 hours and I really…REALLY think it could have been 90 minutes and done. I didnt need to see Kevin go shopping, its a nice touch…But I didnt NEED it. I didnt need to see the wet bandits skulking the neighbourhood 3-4 times before the final robbery attempt. Once or twice would have more than set that up for me. Theres a lot of scenes of people just running around, or sitting looking sad, and while *some* of that is nice, I feel it does slow the film down quite a bit, and when the film seems to be trading on fast paced fun, pausing things for a slow 5 minute sequence of the burglars wandering around the outside of the house was a detractor for me.

Clocking in at an hour and 45 also explains why it hasnt really been on regular rotation at christmas for previous years. Being one of the busiest times of year, a 90 minute picture tends to fit in better with my schedules. Once you start to break an hour and 40 I have to plan my day around watching whatever it is im going to be watching…So it was less a case of ‘I didnt like it’ and more ‘I didnt have an afternoon to work through this thing’.

outside of my script grumbles, the cine and direction are the usual John Hughes standard. Crisp, clean shots that have a clear vision behind them. The man just *got* christmas as an artistic medium. He just KNOWS how to set a shot up to look rich, and warm, and welcoming…its superb work. Only enhanced by some of John Williams best work being married up to a jukebox soundtrack of 50s and 60s christmas bops. AND an astounding cast who really help bring a realism to the piece.

I enjoyed ‘Home Alone’, but I didnt LOVE it. I think kids proabably would get more out of it than I do (obviously; its a kids film…) But I think this is one of those movies where, if its on in the background, i’d dip in and out of it. If I had a whole day around christmas with nothing to do, i’d probably chuck it on….But I dont think i’d actively CHOOSE it, It wouldnt be the first christmas film for me to check off on my list…Good, but there are better.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/home-alone/

A somewhat surprising entry into the early 80’s SOV genre. ‘Suffer Little Children’ is a bit of an interesting experiment. It’s 1983, you’re a rock promoter who’s just lost it all in a divorce and your best friend (and future wife) owns a drama school…You have experience shooting promo pieces and music videos and your friend has access to a derelict house and a small army of children and young adults ranging from 8 to 30. What do you do?

You make a fairly gory Possession/slasher flick and release it RIGHT as the UK is about to pass the ‘Video recordings act’ that makes it nearly impossible to do ANYTHING remotely gory LETALONE with children. As you can imagine, this film went through the ringer when it came out in 1984. Which is a shame. Because, given this is a VERY early example of distributed SOV cinema (I believe this is the first UK SOV film to be professionally distributed) Its actually pretty well put together.

The plot concerns the mysterious appearence of a young mute girl at a childrens home. The staff take her in and try to medically assess her, but they cant find any evidence of where she’s come from, and after a visit to the doctors, they confirm that nothing is *physically* wrong with her, and that her mute-ness may be down to either trauma or some kind of psychological block.

They try to intigrate her into the home, but strange happenings begin to occur. some of the kids start getting hurt badly and in a particularly dramatic sequence a kid who walks with a stick either falls os is pushed down a flight of stairs, landing in directly in ‘intensive care’

as the weird violence starts to escalate further and further, the carehomes staff ‘Morris’ and ‘Jen’ begin to become increasingly suspicious of Liz…but will they figure out whats going on before it’s all too late?

And honestly, given this was an experiment to see if shooting a film on video tape, and having almost every aspect shaped by its child cast, would be profitable. I think this things basic…but enjoyable.

The scripting is decent, engaging and entertaining. I think it sags a bit in the middle and theres a bit of repetition that goes on. the tone is a bit all over the place as well, sometimes presenting as just a straight horror film, but rarely it also dealves into the supernatural. With a dream sequence involving zombies being particularly unsettling and ‘otherworldly’ It feels out of place in this film…which in many ways makes it fit in perfectly.

The pacing is slow boil. Which is a bit problematic. The film clocks in at just over 75 minutes…and I feel it could have been 15 minutes shorter than that and a LOT better for it. But then…that would have put it under feature runtime…so it wouldnt have sold.

The 3 act structures a bit sloppy too. the opening and closing 15 minutes are fine and really open and close the film well I feel. but everything in the middle feels inconsistent and frankly…odd. Its like the film doesnt really know what to do to help build tension ready for the 3rd act. So it manufactures an off screen event, and then just repeats a few scenes 2-3 times to get us up to runtime. Which was a bit dissapointing.

That being said, the dialogues decent enough, the gore shots, I feel could have been better spread out (they all seem to be bunched up in the 3rd act) but they’re very effectively executed and the finale is great fun and VERY surreal.

The direction and cine are all fairly basic. in fact; barring the 3rd act finale which REALLY feels like the director pulled out all the stops. Most of this film just kind of feels like a film makers first outing. shots are fairly competently composed. But a little simplistic and overly constructed, this is a rare instance where I feel like a director tries to show us TOO much rather than just telling us.

Part of me feels the slow and basic plodding of the direction was intentional to get it to runtime, but part of me does just think this was someone who was only vaguely familiar with film pacing, getting to grips with 3 act structures in real time.

That being said, the cine while a bit flat and basic IS consistent, has fairly decent blocking and B-roll to help bring the scenes to life and in the 3rd act is genuinely impressive given there was maybe less than 6 SOV feature films in existence by this point in 1983/84?…and non of those 6 had made it over to UK shores by the time these guys were filming this. So its BEYOND interesting to see the director and the cast get to grips with set blocking and layout on the fly over the course of this films production.

Theres some attempts at coloured lighting use, they do experiement with angles and transition cuts which is fun. But even so, it doenst exactly push the envelope.

And the editing is a real dissapointment all things considered. Given they were cutting tape for this production, and given how few people were ABLE to cut on tape at this time, its miraculous the thing looks as good as it does. However, broadly speaking, cuts are clunky and awkward…there are moments where the blanking on the tape appears because they didnt match the frame cuts properly and some of the early video effects do fail quite badly in places. its all part of the charm. But its SUPER obvious 40 years on.

The cast are all fairly solid. its a bit of a mixed ability room, but given these are all drama school students or friends of the crew….it was always going to be a little hit and miss. I can say catagorically there were no BAD performers here…just good and ‘less than good’.

All this is matched up to a superb soundtrack thats heavy on rock and synth scoring, but it doenst feel as tinny or thin as other SOV flicks. this sounds richer and more engaging. It punctuates the film nicely and I feel really gives it the edge that JUST manages to tip it into being a solid end product.

‘Suffer Little Children’ I feel was an interesting experiment. I’d go as far as to say its a successful one. Its rudimentary in it’s execution. But it has BUCKETS of charisma and a really solid atmosphere about it. Its a fun and unique look into the very early day of SOV cinema AND an insightful look at just how creative and interesting kids can be when they’re given control of the film production process, with the adults just helping to tangibly bring to life what the kids wanted.

I’d recommend checking this one out at least once if you have even a basic interest in the film making process, purely because its an interesting insight into seeing how people who have never made a movie, but have *some* experience in shooting things, go about making a movie. If you can overlook the wobbly production and minimalist approach. I think you’ll really get on with this DIY horror production. I’ll absolutely watch it again!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/suffer-little-children/

Watched on Friday December 15, 2023.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/a-christmas-story-1983/1/