TYTD Reviews

One picked by the missus for a pre Halloween movie night, it was my first time catching ‘Pet Sematary’ tonight and, while overall I quite enjoyed it. It is a film that isn’t without its problems.

While the plot itself is engaging, and I can imagine the novelisation of this is quite thrilling, it’s translation to film isn’t the smoothest in the world.

Clocking in at just shy of an hour and 45 minutes, it keeps a good pace primarily on its charismatic and engaging characters, but the plot itself does seem to run thin at several points throughout, with lots of repetition, padding and Jud saying the word ‘road’ to a frankly illegal level.

The tone is bleak with a slight dark comedy edge, which is fine, but there’s WAY too many continuity errors in this thing, or just…plot points that don’t entirely make logical or physical sense. With the ending in particular being a big problem for me as all rationale went out the window and the thing just became overly silly.

I also had some issues with the effects in this film…they’re kind of lame…a bit of white face paint and some ketchup is about as interesting as the general effects get, and even the bigger ‘showstoppers moments really haven’t aged as well as you’d think.

The direction and cine however are astounding, really rock solid, easily one of the nicer shot horror films of the back end of the 80s, with a genuine sense of suspense and thrill running through this thing. It’s stylish, well coloured and looks great!

Add to this the performances, which are also really rock solid and are genuinely the one thing that properly carries this movie through even the most questionable moments. They’re animate, charismatic use their set space well and really work with the props too.

All in all? While I really got on with the vibe this film was putting out (and I’m sure I’ll watch it again) the wobbly effects, combined with a lacklustre ending and plenty of padding kind of holds this back from really achieving its fullest potential. I’m sure many have strong nostalgia for this one, but as a first timer…while I can see the appeal, its flaws are quite pronounced.

Recommended if you’ve seen ‘the classics’ but not one worth rushing to in my opinion.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/pet-sematary/

Watched on Monday October 30, 2023.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/things/1/

Widely considered to be the first ‘entirely E2E process ran SOV movie’ 1983’s ‘Sledgehammer’ is, for some, an endurance test to see how long an audience member will be willing to sit through wide shots of a house or a stairwell that serve no purpose, but are called back on repeatedly across the 85(ish) minute runtime.

Its kind of a novel idea really; director David A Prior had an apartment that was free for a couple of months, he’d heard about domestic home video camera technology and decided he could probably make some money out of shooting a horror movie on the DL for cheap at the vacant apartment.

It’s not a particularly complex plotline, a group of friends decide to rent out a cabin in a woodland area for a couple of nights to have a big old party, each of the group is bringing a bit of a backstory with them, that slowly gets eeked out of them across the runtime. Little do the gang know, but several years prior; a couple were blugeoned to death and the couples child vanished without a trace.

Now many years on, a mysterious ghostly man in a mask stalks the cabin with a sledgehammer, ready to pick off anyone who gets in his way.

I personally have some quite good memories with this film, It first came my way during a particularly good summer via ‘The Last Drive in with Joe Bob Briggs’ and While there is a LOT of things I cant defend this film for, from a purely biased and self interested standpoint, I always enjoy watching this movie, its got a very strange woozy atmosphere to it that makes it feel like a living dream for most of the runtime. That does however include the drawbacks as much as the benefits.

The scripts plot is fiiiiiine, a little on the basic side, but hey; killer ghost stalks some folks in a cabin for 80 minutes doesnt have to be hamlet, and if the ‘Friday the 13th’ movies can get away with doing similar for *at least* 8 of there 12 movies, I can hardly complain here.

The script pacing is pretty decent, it does feel like theres a few acts that have been hacked out of this thing in the first act that would have better set up our main characters, because this film kind of drops them onto us, doesnt really do much to bed them in; and the history of the killer is kind of left to the opening 10 minutes of the movie or so and not much else. As far as the plot on paper goes, it’s a zippy little page turner with plenty of suspence, but the translation from script to screen is disasterous to say the least.

what should be tension building atmospheric shots just hang…hang for an eternity, way past the point of any natural kind of cut, making the whole thing feel INCREDIBLY awkward for most of the runtime. Its a clear issue of whoever cut this thing not knowing what the hell they were doing, but the end results totally mangle the script pacing and render the film with an almost alien quality for lack of a better descriptive.

It really feels like aliens made this film, edited it and then handed it back to us for distribution, almost every aspect of the production just feels…odd.

The tone of the film jumps between a hardcore slasher flick and the a kind of ‘horror comedy’ that some characters in a proper movie may have running on a TV in the background. Non of the characters dialogue feels like anything normal humans would say, and the delivery the actors give is stunted, strange and pretty otherworldly.

The shots all have this ‘vasaline on the lens’ quality that makes everything feel overly soft and hazy, which is compounded by the VHS presentation to the point that it almost feels like this is being viewed from another dimension.

The edits are hard, blunt and innacurate, it throws the pacing and can be frankly painful to see as someone who’s worked in editing. So lord knows what people who havent cut something together would make of this.

There is a fairly decent use of coloured lighting in this, with some very styalized moments of blue and red. But the majority of the film sits in this strange beige and cream monstrocity, that just wouldnt be seen in any other production that wasnt being shot in the early 80s, on the cheap, in an apartment that was being stripped down.

The cast come across as largely all likeable, but theres no directional guidence seemingly to help them figure out what they’re supposed to be doing, as such their energy seems to come out in bursts at THE strangest moments with no rhyme or reason, and with it comes some frantic flailing and organized chaos. If they’re not randomly going insane, they’re being incredibly irritating, but in a way that I personally find fascinating. Like…they say script writing and story telling is marketing experiences. if this is what David A Priors experience of talking to people is, may god have mercy on his soul.

but the killer blow this film has has GOT to be its score, the recent ‘Intervision’ release of this suggests turning the bass and volume up on your equipment for the best results, and they are NOT kidding, with a bass line that’ll rattle the earth core, this thing is synth heavy drone sound for nearly the full runtime, and through a decent pair of Anker headphones, when that bass dropped, I basically saw through time. its nuts. Very effective ,very unique and very fitting for this film. It really helps pull all the awkward, hamfisted weirdness together into a package that I really am quite smitten with.

Despite the issues raised above, ‘Sledgehammer’ to me? is EXACTLY what I want when I check out SOV cinema that isnt trying to compete with studio flicks. Its fuzzy, incoherent, unsettling, strange and crafted with the subtlety of a dump truck. If you were trying to convince someone that SOV cinema was able to rival bigger budgeted productions, you would NOT be showing them ‘Sledgehammer’ but if you are quite well versed in SOV as a genre, this things a christmas gift. You’ll laugh, you’ll wince, you’ll wonder what the hell is going on. and it’ll be all over before you’re even able to settle your feelings on it.

And I love it for that.

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

For me? ‘The Monster Club’ is the cinematic equivilent of a comfy blanket and a delcious hot drink. A gentle offering from Amacus productions in association with the UK broadcasting company ‘ITV’, ‘The Monster Club’ is a 3 part anthology series that, while pretty low on scares, is the perfect accompanyment to any halloween party.

The plot? A famous horror author (John Carradine) helps a passing vampire (Vincent Price) out with a late night snack, and in exchange said vampire offers to repay the author with a trip to the most exclusive ‘Monster Club’ a hidden venue that houses all the spooky creatures your could possibly imagine. When they arrive at the club they’re treated as honoured guests, and in a private booth Price regails the author with three tales of terror, including the story of a young woman who attempts to rob a ‘hideous’ (not really) loner who turns out to be more than she bargained for.

A young boy who gets caught up with an army of vampire hunters (led by Donald Pleasence) who’re on the hunt for his father. And the story of a film producer who takes a wrong turn into a terrifying netherworld filled with ghoulish cannibals! All broken up with some top shelf beats from the finest bands 1981 had to offer!

‘The Monster Club’ to me is somewhat imperfect, but I find that to be part of it’s charm, The script feels very much like a ‘Made for TV movie’ production (partially because it kind of was) but every flaw I find in this film, just presents itself as kind of charming. While the film seemingly has no intention of being family oriented, theres no blood, guts or gore on display here, theres a couple of moments of unsettling imagery, but other than a stripper scene (which itself is played for comedic effect and doesnt actually feature any nudity) this could quite easily have been a kids movie, if not a young adults feature.

The monsters all look SUPER fake, quite literally just people in halloween masks, or folks with their faces painted white and plastic dracula fangs, but its all part of the charm, it comes across to me as a kind of ‘old world’ horror aesthetic, a genre thats really kind of missing in the moder horror ecosystem. It’s a dorky little movie, but its so sincere in what it wants to do that I genuinely cant help but champion it as a fun and enjoyable work.

The script itself is a rip roarer, just over 90 minutes long and it really doesnt feel it. the weirdest (and biggest) problem this film has is simply that I feel it maybe could have gone a *bit* harder on the horror elements and that some of the translation from script to screen seems to not quite have gone to plan.

The first story is the one that suffers the most to me, the story of a young woman who takes a job cleaning the manor house of a ‘Shadmock’ (a beast that can cause awful things to happen if it whistles) the issue? both Price as the narrator AND the woman in the film state that ‘Shadmocks’ are hideous beasts, utterly disgusting to look at and frankly terrifying. When we meet our Shadmock however, he’s basically just a guy in white facepaint with slightly thicker eyebrows than normal. if anything he’s kind of handsome.

It totally defangs the story because, why build up that this creatures utterly hideous, only to then reveal him to be basically just a guy with a touch of anemia? While that story does end on a bit of a high, the flaw in presentation undercuts it unfortunately.

The second story is much more lighthearted, Donald Pleasence plays a pretty mean vampire hunter here, but while this is one of the few moments blood on screen is shown. it is essentially just a 20 minute runaround leading to a punchline that is just a little bit dumb. I really enjoy the vibe of it and just how cheeky and tongue in cheek it can be. But I think your milage may vary depending on how willing you are to sit through a lot of padding for some half decent performances and a relatively weak punchline.

For the hardcore horror fanatics, its the final story that’ll likely be the redeemer for this film, straight out of what feels like an 80s italian horror movie of the ilk of ‘Fulci’, this is a very atmospheric piece, thats low on gore and blood, but SO high on atmosphere, tension and the creepy factor that It always never fails to win me over. With a genuinely decent set of twists and turns, had this story been a feature length production i’d have been quite delighted, but as a short it works wonderfully.

The dialogue across the board is delightful, everyone seems to be having fun with the production, the direction and cine does have a vague heir of the ‘TV movie’ about it in places…But then there are moments that seem to surpass even some of the blockbuster studio heavy hitters of the year.

Its a heavily stylized production that bathes in that wonderful early 80s sense of kitsch horror and halloween. Which when married up to the UK sensibilities of the crew, locations and storytelling makes a totally unique and very enjoyable campy viewing experience.

Add to that some wonderfully animate and engaging performances, the killer soundtrack featuring tracks from UB40 and BA Robertson and its absolute adoration for rock solid lighting setups and vivid colour usage, and while I feel ‘The Monster Club’ wont be for everyone. I absolutely adore it. I try and catch it at least once a year if I can, and if your into your horror anthologies or the campier entries in Vincent Prices filmography as I am, im sure you’ll have an absolute blast with this one! MONSTERS RULE! OK!?

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-monster-club/

I had quite low expectations going into ‘Wacko’ Not because I figured it was going to be badly made or anything like that, its just that…whenever a movie markets itself on being ‘SO CERRR-AZY!’ it makes me nervous…ESPECIALLY with older films that do that… It basically sets the expectation that your going to be getting 90 minutes of the absolutley lowest common denonimation humour, nothing but fart jokes, sex jokes, nudity and probably a lot of racism, mysoginy or homophobia to boot.

Which is why I was honestly quite pleasently surprised by ‘Wacko’. rather than looking at the ‘Scary Movie’ mold of comedy horror, this film instead cuts its teeth by the zucker brothers tone of ‘Airplane!’ and ‘The Naked Gun’ with plenty of communcation gags, visual pieces and slapstick. Make no mistake, it’s nowhere near as GOOD as a Zucker production, in fact it takes stupid humour to new frontiers honestly…but it’s a good spirited watch thats totally daft, very light in tone and has plenty of surprises along the way.

The plot follows one Mary Graves, 13 years ago her sister was slaine by an infamous and mysterious pumpkin headed killer in a bizarre Lawnmower incident in front of several kids (including Mary) during the annual ‘Pumpkin Prom’ now 13 years later, It’s Mary’s turn to go to the prom, and the killer may be making a return.

On the case? One Joe Don Baker, who plays a grizzled cop who’s been on the case for the last 13 years and still hasnt found who it is. Complicating matters further, a few days before the prom an insane inmate escapes from the local asylum wearing nothing but a trenchcoat and boots…

As you can imagine, Hilarity ensues.

And…yeh; I actually kind of had a soft spot for this one, I enjoy comedies that do ‘Stupid’ in a kind of smart way, and ‘Wacko’ is most definitely one of those movies. While the comedy itself does feel a bit like someones been rooting around in the Zucker brothers trash for discarded gags, The pacing is good, the hit rate on humour is high. it feels pretty zippy for 86(ish) minutes and the tone couldnt really get any lighter if it tried.

One thing I was quite happy about is the lack of gross out humour here. its an easy ride to stuff comedies like this with jokes about bodily fluids, erections or lewd acts. But ‘Wacko’ really kind of manages to steer away from that. We do unfortunatley get a few parodies of major horror movies of the time (Alien, Halloween, The Exorcist) which felt strained and ‘done’ even by 1982…and it gets even WORSE when they do some of those parody gags MULTIPLE TIMES within the same act. But mercifully they’re few and far between and the film rumbles to completion with a satisfying ending to a daffy story.

The film absolutely doesnt take itself seriously to ANY degree, and as such the characters are surface level developed, which here only helps keep the comedy nice and pacey as you realise that noone here needs any kind of grounding because the film is THAT dedicated to not being serious. This is the kind of movie that could completely derail into another genre entirely for 25 minutes and you wouldnt bat an eye.

the direction is pretty basic, but it hits the right notes; I do wish they’d gone maybe a little bit grander in stylization, but hey, this thing was aiming to mop up folks who wernt going to the major releases of that year. It does what it sets out to do, while it’s basic, its effective; and while there was definitely room for improvement, it gets in, gets the job done, and gets out…thats all I can really ask for when such craziness is going on.

The cine is equally kind of basic, but what they lack in compositional flare they more than make up for with effects and grander set pieces, expect plenty of blood, pumpkin filling and strange visuals here make NO mistake, the edit keeps a good pace, it feels tight with sequences that breath just enough to really help an audience relax into it. If I was nitpicking, i’d argue that some of the scenes could have done with just a few more shots and takes to help give them a bit more life, but on the whole? this things fiiiiiine.

Its the performances here that really sell it, With the majority of the cast playing things very deadpan and straight, in the vein if ‘Airplane’ or ‘Naked Gun’. George Kennedy and Joe Don Baker are probably the best of the bunch here, but they’re both old hands at this kind of thing, and JDB doing essentially a parody of the role he played in ‘Mitchell’ is just a delight. they have great comedy timing, the express EXACTLY what was needed when it was needed. and I think arguably they’re the people who save this film from completely falling over.

Julia Duffy as Mary is equally in lock step with the pair, playing an animated and very physically present take on the character, I really enjoyed her performance and I think she really got what the kind of tone this film was aiming for. She aced the assignment for me.

Adding to this a soundtrack that does seem a little out of place for a movie like this, it almost feels like a bit of a hodge podge of ‘in joke’ style rock-pop tracks and references to other horror movies as parody tracks (probably the biggest being the ‘Alfred Hitchcock presents theme’ getting used frequently throughout…because…why not?

I came away from ‘Wacko’ pleasently surprised. It didnt blow me away, but I went in expecting ‘bad comedy’ and came away having genuinely laughed multiple times across the runtime. While it does have its flaws, I think ‘Wacko’ does ultimatley manage to stick the landing, and while I wont say it’s an essential watch. I’d say check it out if your looking for an answer to the question ‘what if the zuckers did a ‘slasher’ parody’.

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

Watched on Thursday October 26, 2023.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/sleepaway-camp-ii-unhappy-campers/1/

‘Popcorn’ had been on the horizon of my ‘To watch’ pile for literal years until fairly recently when a die hard fan of this 1991 slightly demented comedy slasher halted a live stream I was watching for a solid 5 minutes to passionately monologue about how underseen this thing was and how they considered it to be one of the greatest slasher movies ever made…That’s some pretty big talk, but they sold me on the pitch. So one Amazon halloween sale later, I checked it out. And…they wernt that far off the mark honestly.

Popcorn is a very affectionate tribute to ‘Gimmick cinema’ in all it’s various flavours, think of it as the midway point between Joe Dantes ‘Matinee’ and Rick Sloans ‘Blood Theater’ and your not a million miles off.

The film follows a group of film students who are looking to try and raise some cash to allow them to continue their film society and maybe even grease the wheels of getting a new production off the ground. After a couple of weeks of backing and forthing on what to do, they decide to host an all night ‘horror-thon’ showing 3 movies back to back (with bands!) that are all parodies of 50’s B-movie classics, and that all have some variation on an actual real world gimmick piece. ‘Mosquito’ for example features a giant mosquito that flies over the audience ala ‘House on haunted hill’ alongside it being in 3d, ‘Attack of the Amazing Electrified Man’ features a variation on ‘Percepto’ with audience members getting electrocuted in their chairs at key points in the film.

So far, so nostalgic, But things arnt quite as cheesy and cozy as it seems, when one of the students ‘Molly’ reveals that shes been experiencing psychadelic nightmares in which shes being hunted by a bearded man who wants her dead. While sorting out the reels for the movie night, they stumble on an incredibly short reel that isnt part of their featured evening. On playing it, it’s revealed to be ‘Possessor’ a thought lost movie made by the great experimental film director ‘Lanyard Gates’ who infamously ACTUALLY murdered his family at the end of the movie before torching the theater down, killing over 40 people.

Molly recognises the bearded man in ‘Possessor’ as the man in her nightmares, but things just arnt adding up, and with the main show starting imminently…the gang may find themselves in a LOT more trouble than they bargained for.

And I feel this film really kind of hit the sweet spot of being goofy enough that it was charming, but serious enough that it made the kills and drama feel worth investing in. While I will say that the tone on this DOES wobble from time to time, sometimes ending up TOO gnarley and sometimes ending up irritatingly goofy, it never quite completely falls over and on the whole manages to hold itself together across the full runtime.

The film is solidly paced, not quite as zippy as i’d like, but quick enough that I didnt get bored, wander off or start googling the actors, so I see that as a plus. The act structuring is solid with no real issues to report it knows when to change gears narrative wise, when to raise the stakes and when to let things slow boil. The characters have enough going on about them to keep the film feeling busy, but some of them do have a bit of an identity crisis, wherein I because they all acted kind of ‘samey’ it meant I sometimes lost track of who was who and who was supposed to be doing what.

That being said, balancing that out is some delightful dialogue which really hits the spot and I could see being very quoteable after a couple more watches.

The plot itself is very entertaining, a little bit trippy and the humour lands more than it fall for me personally. I did feel the ending was a little on the weak side, especially given how much it was bigged up across the runtime, but this is really more of a movie you watch to enjoy the ride rather than relying on the ending to deliver a wallop. With that said, had the ending been a bit more powerful, i’d honestly have very little to complain about with this thing.

The direction is fab, highly styalized and heavily reliant on coloured lighting, it reminded me a bit of ‘Creepshow’ in terms of how things were laid out. theres a clear vision on display here and I think despite the production changing directors about halfway through, this still surprisingly feels coherent to me.

The cine too is great, not only do the main theater moments pop with crisp and vivid colours and decent composition and blocking, particularly in the dream sequences where things get psychadelic to almost ‘Hasu’ (1977) levels…and thats not to mention that I feel they do a great job of the ‘retro movie’ sequences as well! with the scenes from ‘Mosquito’ in particular really managing to catch that ‘columbia pictures’ 1950’s/1960’s stylizastion. I honestly really loved this thing visually.

The editing is fine enough, I think the first couple of acts are stronger than the 3rd act. It feels to me almost like they shot diligently in the first 2 acts worth of scenes, but as the money and time started to run out, the need for ‘the essentials’ to be grabbed outweighed creative liberty. As a result some of the kills and the end sequence in particular do feel a bit rushed and confusing in places. but on the whole the editors here have managed to keep things on a decent footing and this edit breaths pretty fine for most of the runtime.

The performances are simultaineously some of the most memorable and best parts of this movie, while also being the weakest. On the one hand the delivery of the dialogue that our cast offer is hammy, WAY over the top and utterly delightful to sit through, their physicality is wonderful and it really does feel like the cast are throwing there all behind the picture. On the other hand, it really does feel like the cast are constantly throwing their ALL behind this picture…Even if their ‘All’ isnt really particularly great. expect moments of BEYOND stiff physical performance, line deliveries that are laughably awful in places and a near total lack of camera placement awareness (that last ones not their fault…it feels like a miscommunication with the director) I LOVE the performances in this thing, but if your averse to cheesy acting. this will not be your rodeo.

And the soundtrack is a mixture of Reggae and 90s style beat pop. predominantly because this film was almost entirely shot on location in Jamaica…I think it suits the film fine personally, I couldnt…nor would I want to imagine this thing having a fitting score, because the film itself is so demented in places, having the weird scoring almost feels complimentary to the other weird aspects.

‘Popcorn’ bombed at the box office, which is a real shame (that being said…thats what happens when you release your horror movie in early February!) I think had this come out around halloween time 1990/1991, it probably would have fared quite a bit better. It has developed a cult following over the years, and I can absolutely see why. With striking visuals, and interesting, campy and engaging plot. Some nice callbacks to the Atom age of film making and some bizarre performances and tones. ‘Popcorn’ feels like something rather special. I really quite enjoyed myself, and I can happily recommend you check it out. it’d probably pair quite well with something like ‘Blood Theater’ or ‘Phantom of the Ritz’.

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

Watched on Tuesday October 24, 2023.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/hack-o-lantern/1/

A near perfect combination of the unsettling and disturbing work of Clive Barker, married up to the fantastical, otherworldly and surreally vivid imagery of Bernard Rose has here yielded a deeply unpleasent, but highly compelling work.

‘Candyman’ follows two university students Helen and Brianna, they’re studying folk legends as part of their final dissertation, when the pair stumble on one unique not just to their city, but unique to their immediate area. The tale of ‘The Candyman’ a folklore spread largely amongst the local black community about the son of a slave who grew up to become a famous painter who was brutally murdered by malicious slave owners who dissapproved of his relationship with a white woman with whome he fathered a child. The Candyman was tortured, had his right hand hacked off with a rusty saw, and was smothered in honeycomb and left to be stung to death, nude, in the boiling summer sun.

He swore his revenge and its claimed that anyone who says his name 5 times in a mirror and then turns out the lights will find themselves on the reciving end of Candymans hook. Helen and Brianna are sceptical, but…for fun, they try it anyway…And what can only be described as chaos unfolds for them, as a string of awful events begin to befall Helen culminating in her being accused of murder and kidnap of a young baby. Helens world spirals out of control and as the Candyman gets closer and closer to her. Helen begins to realise that there may be even more than she realised to the legend.

I remember catching this one years ago and kind of being a bit nonplussed by it. At the time i was on a Clive Barker kick, fresh off some of the Hellraiser films and ‘Candyman’ seemed like an extension of that kind of gory unpleasentness. So I put it in, and 97 minutes later, I ejected it fairly non plussed and quite dissapointed…I was a fool.

Because ‘Candyman’ is a wonderful examination of how legends and rumours can run rampent, how fear effects the psyche and how the boundaries of reality and something altogether more supernatural can be manipulated very effectively.

The script is a zippy 97(ish) minutes long, has a clean 3 act structure with which it transitions effortless between those acts. the pacing is excellent with new information thats almost always relevent being thrown at the audience constantly. The tone is wonderfully bleak, not just for its vivid imagery of impovrished black communities, but in a similar vein to ‘The Devils’ this is a film that revels on almost every level in showing just how awful things CAN get.

I was constantly in a state of being kept on my toes with this one, and even up to the closing minutes, I was hooked in finding out exactly what was going to happen next. The characters are all wonderfully written with deep rooted complexities that slowly reveal themselves as the film progresses. its got a exemplary ‘slow boil’ quality to it that gently works up the suspence and thrills to a fevered pitch, before leaving the audience to decide exactly what they’ve just witnessed and how much of it was real, and how much of it was Helens own manifestation.

The direction and cine? Pfft, this is the near perfect dovetail of Bernard Rose and Clive Barker’s creative zennith. Rose having just come from ‘Paperhouse’, one of the most visually stunning films of the late 80s, and Barker having just capped off ‘Hellraiser 2’ and ‘Nightbreed’. The pair were in their prime, and ‘Candyman’ is one of the most visually striking works I think either of the pair have ever produced.

Its a rich, grotty, dirty, sumptuous take on decaying suburbia, rich in set design, rock solid in style and tonal direction. GORGEOUS compositional choices throughout that do NOT shy away from showing the beauty in true uglyness. While I will say it would have been nice to have a bit more colour present here (a lot of this film is browns, blacks, moulding/festering greens and blues) I can absolutely appreciate this work for what it is, and Rose has used contrasting colours VERY sparingly here, I feel to great effect.

The edit keeps tremendous pace, utilises B-roll effectively and allows this thing to breath comfortably, without making it overstay its welcome. This is a film that I feel hits the EXACT sweet spot it needed to. Not too long that I feel it could have been trimmed, not too short that it leaves me really wanting more. It tells an effective story for EXACTLY as long as it needs to and then it gets out.

The performances are genre defining quite frankly, with Tony Todd absolutely OWNING the role of the ‘Candyman’ bringing a tremendous sense of power, sadness and vengence to the role that I dont feel any other actor could have quite mustered. he’s seen sparingly here, but that just means when he is on screen front and center, he’s an absolute powerhouse.

Vanessa Madsen as Helen is also astounding, getting a full range of emotions to work through across the runtime as shes REALLY put through the ringer. She nails almost every scene she’s in, is animate and Rose seems to have really given the cast the precise information they needed because every scene is astounding, its animate, lively, set space and props get used very effectively, its just a really sold work from the cast here, I honestly cant grumble.

And the soundtracks delightful too, It’s Phillip Glass, and barring one or two synth tracks (the opening titles in particular) where I feel the synth versions would have worked so much better with ACTUAL orchestral instruments. It helps set the tone of this picture perfectly and really acts as the bow on top of the present here, tying everything together beautifully.

‘Candyman’ is a rock solid production from start to finish, and barring a couple of scenes that felt a bit laboured to me personally, a ‘twist’ ending that hasnt aged too well (it reads more goofy now than terrifying) and a couple of dodgey synth tracks on the OST, it’s more or less faultless to me. HIGHLY recommended if you havent seen it before. My gut tells me to just stop at this one as its a great self contained story. But your milage may vary.

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

My final stop on a marathon of the ‘Friday the 13th’ movies, and this was a first time spin for me, I missed this when it was out in theaters after being told it really wasnt worth the price of admission. However; a ‘Google Movies’ sale a few months back put this on in HD for a good enough price that I thought it was worth taking the risk on it. Honestly? Im kind of glad I did, as 2009’s ‘Friday the 13th’ is probably the best entry in the series since the Paramount years…That’s not really saying much. But it’s nice to see a bit of a return to form!

The plot is pretty straightforward, the film opens with a quick (slightly altered) recreation of the end of the original ‘Friday the 13th’ (they do get the dates wrong here as this film has those events taking place in 1980…but the original film itself states the events took place in 1979…splitting hairs I know but…That did bother me a bit)

We then jump forward to the present day (2009) as a group of teens are heading up to one of their dads hunting lodge near crystal lake to party down! On the way up there, the gang bump into ‘Clay’ a guy who’s handing out missing persons flyers trying to find his sister Whitney, who dissapeared under mysterious circumstances alongside all her friends a number of months ago while hiking in the woods…You can guess who’s responsible for THAT little encounter…

Anyway, the gang get to the lodge, they start playing drinking games, having lots of sex and doing naughty drugs…Clay turns up at the lodge to hand out fliers not knowing the teens he ran into a short time ago are staying there, which causes some friction with members of the group…In any case, it doesnt take long for Jason to re-emerge to teach these teens a lesson, with only Clay and a handful of survivors finally getting to the bottom of what happened to Whitney and what fate may lie in store for them!

And, given the last two Jason movies were bad enough to put me off EVER checking out ANYTHING New Line Cinema wanted to do with the character ever again, I have to be honest and say I actually kind of liked this one.

It fits in with the other movies pretty nicely (barring the odd minor continuity issue) You could either jump straight from the first movie to this one, OR you could watch ‘The Paramount Years’ and then skip ‘Final Friday’ and ‘Jason X’ and just head straight into this thing with a minor bit of headcannon being that ‘Jason took the Loooooooooong way back to Crystal lake from Manhatten’ and It fits in pretty much fine.

The script isnt exactly breaking new ground, Its essentially a mishmash of the first 4 Friday movies but with looser censorship laws meaning the sex is more graphic and the kills more bloody and violent. Again; to me? given the last 2 films in this franchise couldnt have gotten further AWAY from what a ‘Friday the 13th’ movie is supposed to be all about, I absolutely understand why for this 2009 soft reboot of the franchise, they chose to play things a bit safer. In fairness, this is the first time Jasons been picking off teens in the woods since 1988. and things have kind of moved on a fair bit since ‘Part 7’

The scripts fine. I have no major issues with it really, its maybe a little bit slower on the pacing than i’d have really liked. but we have a clean 3 act structure that transitions well, there are a couple of nice twists here that help make things a bit more interesting and the characters actually do have a bit of personality about them beyond a surface level interpretation.

The tone emphises horror over dark comedy, but it isnt afraid to have a bit of a laugh if it suits the nature of the movie, which is nice. I think…really, my only main criticism is it’s overly safe and a bit generic. there are some scenes where things slow down a bit too much, if you’ve sat through the other 11 of these (like I have) you can pretty much tell from the get go who’s not going to make it to the 3rd act. and the deaths are (mostly) all plays on stuff we’ve seen before, only…because of a relaxation on censorship around violence, here; we get to see even gnarlier and more bloody after shots of bodies being hacked, burned alive and mangled.

In short, it reads like an F13 film, as written by a team who’ve been tasked with recentring the series after deviations into psychic battles, trips to Manhatten, mass MASS possession and futuristic cybernetic space upgrades. I feel it achieves that, and had it not been for the legal troubles the franchise encountered shortly after this films release, i’d have actually kind of been interested to see how they developed this on.

The direction is just above the studio standard, This was produced by Michael Bay…which kind of blew my mind. and you can see a bit of an influence of his style and tone present in this movie. The film is very styalized in line with similar remakes and more modern productions from the time (See, ‘The Hills Have Eyes’ (2006), ‘Halloween’ (2007), ‘The Strangers’ (2008) ) It looks the part, but it is very reliant on Blues and firelit oranges to give a faux sense of style, and while for this series, its a definite step up in quality. I cant say that it’s anything we hadnt already seen 3 dozen times before in previous years leading up to this. It doesnt break the mold, but; it does have some strong visuals when compared to its predecessors.

Direction of the cast is fairly solid too, clear communication seems to have been on the cards as the cast are animate, know their marks, are well blocked within the shot and get through their scenes cleanly with little in the way of issue. Again; its kind of expected on studio pic’s for that to be the case, but here I think it does go a little extra.

The cine is really quite solid as well, we have some really nicely composed shots, Jason is obscured for a large chunk of the movie, which im kind of on the fence about, on the one hand; it’s nice to have a little mystery thrown in there. But on the other hand, I do miss those nice lumbering shots the older films had of our guy making his way to the next kill.

Theres a solid use of colour throughout, though that over-reliance on blues and oranges does get a bit bothersome after a while, to it’s credit, this is one of the few 2000’s movies that DIDNT desaturate the everloving crap out of the picture, leaving it a sludgey uninteresting mess. Instead, it actually does have some nice contrasts going on, though it is of the era of crushed blacks and no vibrancy…so…be prepared for colour…but subdued colour.

Additionally; this film also has the same issue a lot of movies from this time have in the horror genre, in that a LOT of the shots are handheld, quick cut close ups and frantic B-roll usage. Its to try and create a sense of unease and confusion…In short a quick, cheap and nasty way to put the audience on alert. But I always personally found that style incredibly frustrating. I enjoy cinema for the worlds it builds, not to spend every other 10 minutes stuck in a 5 minute extreme closeup of some actress bawling her eyes out, while flickers of b-roll crash into the sequence from time to time. I find it very annoying.

Beyond that though, the edits fine enough, I kind fo wish the film was 10 minutes shorter as theres a lot of flab present here that could have been tightened up for a significant improvement. But Im willing to be a bit more forgiving of it given it isnt inoffensive…and again, we’ve just come from 2 of arguably the worst films in the series.

Performance wise, there isnt a single likeable character in this thing, everyones either aloof, an asshole, or some combination of the two. Mercifully non of them really cross the line into being utterly unlikeable. they’re all just varying shades of dislike. Which is something I can work with really.

Its nice to see the cast have a bit of nuance about them…well…the cast that matter at least. Its a mild spoiler, but basically the ones who get backstory? they’re the ones making it to the end. The ones who are just here to drink beer and be horny? yeahhhh…they aint hanging around for too long.

Beyond this the cast are bright, animated, seem to know what they’re doing and give solid performances for this franchise. I cant say they’re great OUTSIDE of this run of movies…but here at least? they’re one of the better lots to come up against Jason…Who might I add is MORE than back on form. here? he looks the part, acts the part, and has a wonderful menace to him that I really appreciated. With some rumblings that the franchise may be getting another movie in a couple years time, I for one really hope they bring Derek Mears back to the role. as, if what I saw here was a taster of what he’s capable of. I think he’d be great in a sequel.

The scores kind of mixed, its got a few jukebox tracks in here, its kind of missing the F13 stuff…but honestly? I didnt miss the original score style too much at all, and I think the new one, while very generic. was inoffensive.

All in all? colour me actually kind of impressed with this thing. while it does suffer from trappings of the era it was made in, and it IS overly safe and generic in places. I feel like the franchise really did need a recentring after the supernatural elements had begun to run rampent and the franchise had begun to come loose from its moorings.

Friday the 13th (2009) doesnt break new ground, but it does set the grounding for what could have been a really solid run of new movies to be built on top of it. Its kind of a shame that this one will probably be relegated to ‘just a one off’ as I think there really was rich soil here to mine.

Not an essential watch by any means, if you DO like the paramount years though (1-8) and were dissillusioned by the new line years up to this point, i’d maybe say check it out.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/friday-the-13th-2009/