Category Archives: Horror

INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS (1956) Throwback Thursday Review

Posted on by
Reply

A timeless, terrifying motion picture! Based on the Collier’s magazine serial turned book The Body Snatchers by Jack Finney, directed by Don Siegel, and produced by Walter Wanger (of Cleopatra infamy), this Allied Artists’ motion picture is the single best representation of the fears and anxieties of the 1950s. But the beauty of this particular picture is that its themes including the fear of conformity, loss of identity, dehumanization, loss of individuality, and even vulnerability are still relevant today, perhaps even more so than they were at the time this seminal horror film was released. 

In Santa Mira, California, Dr. Miles Bennell (Kevin McCarthy) is baffled when all his patients come to him with the same complaint: their loved ones seem to have been replaced by emotionless impostors. Despite others’ dismissive denials, Dr. Bennell, his former girlfriend Becky (Dana Wynter) and his friend Jack (King Donovan) soon discover that the patients’ suspicions are true: an alien species of human duplicates, grown from plant-like pods, is taking over the small town.

While this film sits comfortably in the horror/sci-fi subgenre, it shares a lot of characteristics in common with film noir. Between the recurring narration, a central character in over his head, and the fact events do not turn out favorably for the central character, it pulls on the best of the film noir apparatus to craft a highly unnerving cinematic story that prompts one to think about the state of the world around him or her. 

Perhaps in its day, Invasion of the Body Snatchers was a commentary on the threat of communism/socialism on the American republic, but that is not the only subject to which this film can speak to us decades later. Could it still be read as a warning against the threat of communism today? Sure. But, communism doesn’t look or act like it did back in the 1950s. That’s the danger inherent with famous allegorical films such as this one; the well-known danger is pigeonholing it into only ever meaning what it meant back during the days of the Cold War. When in fact, this film can be read as a commentary on a variety of topics, depending on the worldview of the audience member. 

Whatever the form the existential enemy takes, whether you choose to read it as a commentary on communism, socialism, nationalism, or woke-ism (more accurately defined as applied/reified postmodernism), this film speaks to that which is defined as a threat to one’s present existence. When we label what this film is about, we limit its potential to speak to us. So, it’s better to read the film through its various themes versus defining what the enemy is. From beginning to end, the film depicts events and behaviors that rob individuals of expression, identity, competition, entrepreneurship, and choice in exchange for homogeneity, group think, forced societal roles, and emotion. Ostensibly, this film is about an enemy that seeks to dehumanize and force conformity upon everyone—a world in which everyone is equal and exactly the same versus a world in which we are all equal but definitely not the same. The film demonstrates what happens when we are asleep to the threat of the enemy, and it comes in like a thief in the night. And when we finally recognize the threat, it’s all but too late for us, for humanity, for freedom.

The film begins laying the pipe for the second act reveal of the pod people all the way at the beginning. It’s a scene to which many may not pay particular attention; it’s the scene wherein Miles notices that the Grimaldi vegetable stand is no longer open. One of the characteristics of a society that demonstrates a lack of support or simply opposes free enterprise (or by extension the marketplace of ideas), is manifested in this imagery. Farmer Grimaldi abandoned his private farming business in exchange for supporting the planting and harvesting of the alien pods. Other disturbing imagery is the crisis between the second and third acts wherein Miles and Becky are told that the pod people (replicants of their human counterparts) mean them no harm and want to provide a peaceful existence. The real horror here is that the peaceful existence comes at the cost of freedom and one’s unique identity (all the traits that make one a unique man or woman). These pod people are devoid of any genuine emotion, only exhibit the pretense of it, and see individualism as a threat to their existence.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers is a call to action; it’s a wakeup call to all those that watch it to stand vigilant against tyranny, to stand guard against threats both seen and unseen that seek to undermine what it means to be human. Furthermore, the film posits the idea that the deadliest enemy may not be the one that can be viewed with the naked eye; rather, the deadliest enemy is the one that sneaks in unbeknownst to most individuals. Or maybe it comes disguised as something that sounds great on the surface, but only seeks the destruction of uniqueness, freedom of expression, the marketplace of ideas, and the human dimension of existence. 

Due to the timelessness of the message of this terrifying film, we are drawn back to it time and time again. We are reminded to stand guard against an enemy that seeks to destroy our very way of life. It’s a story of survival and the great cost of freedom. A recurring theme throughout the horror genre is the theme of survival, and Invasion of the Body Snatchers is a brilliant exploration of how to survive against mounting odds that appear unstoppable. Horror films have a way of causing us to rally, causing us to come together in support of our right to survive. There is no other genre that inspires us to fight the enemy like a horror film.

Ryan teaches Film Studies and Screenwriting at the University of Tampa and is a member of the Critics Association of Central Florida and Indie Film Critics of America. If you like this article, check out the others and FOLLOW this blog! Interested in Ryan making a guest appearance on your podcast or contributing to your website? Send him a DM on Twitter. If you’re ever in Tampa or Orlando, feel free to catch a movie with him.

Follow him on Twitter: RLTerry1 and LetterBoxd: RLTerry

ABIGAIL horror movie review

Posted on by
Reply

Fangtastic! Universal Pictures’ Abigail is a wildly entertaining, classically-inspired horror movie that you can really sink your teeth into. It delivers old school vampire movie elements with a contemporary sensibility. Ostensibly, it’s the metaphoric child of Dracula (1931) and The Horror of Dracula (1958). From beginning to end, the terror and laughter continually draw you into the story. Tonally, it strikes a great chord. The narrative never takes itself too seriously; however, it never devolves into parody either. It’s an effective blend of the atmosphere and music of an old school Universal monster picture and the increased gore of Hammer studios. Underscoring the blood-curdling outside/action story is an internal story with a redemptive message and even a little heart.

A group of would-be criminals kidnaps the 12-year-old daughter of a powerful underworld figure. Holding her for ransom in an isolated mansion, their plan starts to unravel when they discover their young captive is actually a bloodthirsty vampire.

From the moment the film opens, I was hooked! It opens with a solitary ballerina gracefully dancing on the stage in an empty auditorium; but what makes this scene particularly alluring is the original Dracula score (selections from Tchaikovsky’s Swan Lake) underscoring the entire opening sequence. It’s a deceptively simple scene that draws us into the beauty of the dance and music. Not only does the iconic music play at the beginning, but variations of it serve as a significant part of the movie’s score. This scene could be made greyscale, and edited to look like it was shot on 1930s 35mm film stock, and I’d almost buy that it was shot nearly 100 years ago.

While the movie may start out in the city, it doesn’t take long to venture into the countryside where a foreboding Tudor style estate serves as the main location for the events of the film. Again, Abigail is channeling Universal’s roots in classic horror by placing our relatively small cast in an isolated expansive estate that could’ve very well been used in a Carl Laemmle/James Whale motion picture. All that was missing was the eerie setting being draped in a dense fog rolling off the moors. As the characters wander through the imposing countryside mansion, the movie effectively established the rules by which the film will live by as it delivers its screamtastic narrative.

Without getting into plot specifics, I can tell you that it’s a simple plot with complex characters–so the best kind of cinematic story! Each and every character is sufficient developed, and quickly. The movie wastes no time at any point. It’s a lean, mean script that snaps, crackles, and pops. Not only is the world build, complete with rules, but the logic of the movie follows the rules and boundaries that it setup for itself during the first act. And while the movie does adhere to many classic vampire tropes, it also subverts some expectations. But not too many. There is one, in particular, to which I feel that it should’ve adhered but identified a way around it for dramatic purposes. But otherwise, I like that it pretty much stuck to the vampire playbook that has been used since Bram Stoker penned the seminal novel.

While there is a lot of blood, I wouldn’t say that it is a particularly violent picture. When the violence and gore hit–they hit–but it’s not gratuitous to the point of exhaustion from the visceral gore and projectile blood. I’d say it’s along the lines of Ready or Not levels of violence/gore. It’s never delivered in a manner that feels disturbing or disgusting; like with the tone, there is a consistent tongue-in-cheeky quality in the fighting or kill scenes. There are some fantastic skills and scenes that I hope make their way into the HHN (Halloween Horror Nights) house that this movie is destined to become this year or next.

the comedy is effectively delivered scene after scene. There is a great combination of humorous dialogue and visually-driven humor. Lots of hilarious image juxtapositions and an over-the-top quality to much of what is experienced. The movie is full of exaggerations, twists, and reversals. Whether the punchline is delivered in an argument or a sight gag, it’s done incredibly well by writers and directors that care. There is one scene that I particularly enjoyed, and it’s the vampire dancing with a headless corpse to the Dracula score. It’s just so ridiculous that you will undoubtedly laugh!

Despite the wildly entertaining qualities of this movie, it is not without some heart. One of the characters learns that constantly feeling like the victim of their circumstances is not constructive, and sometimes the best thing to do is move forward, freeing oneself from the prison of victimization. It was a nice touch that didn’t feel forced, but rather earned by the character.

You don’t want to miss seeing Abigail on the big screen, because the experience will not be the same at home. If you’re a fan of both Universal and Hammer horror, then you’ll want to make sure to watch Abigail in cinemas.

Ryan teaches Film Studies and Screenwriting at the University of Tampa and is a member of the Critics Association of Central Florida and Indie Film Critics of America. If you like this article, check out the others and FOLLOW this blog! Interested in Ryan making a guest appearance on your podcast or contributing to your website? Send him a DM on Twitter. If you’re ever in Tampa or Orlando, feel free to catch a movie with him.

Follow him on Twitter: RLTerry1 and LetterBoxd: RLTerry

GHOSTBUSTERS: FROZEN EMPIRE movie review

Posted on by
Reply

Spooktacular! Nonstop action and laughs from beginning to end. Nicely written and directed with a fantastic mix of legacy and new Ghostbusters elements. Demonstrates connective tissue the soul of the original two Ghostbusters movies whilst delivering plenty of new ideas! With a cast of lead and supporting players that share fantastic chemistry, both legacy and new characters are completely at home in and part of the world of the Ghostbusters. The character dynamics are as sharp and engaging as ever, with moments of humor and camaraderie that work collaboratively to balance the tension with the supernatural threats. With its sleek storytelling and spectacular visuals, you don’t want to miss seeing this movie on the BIG screen.

The Spengler family returns to the iconic New York City firehouse where the original Ghostbusters have taken ghost-busting to the next level. When the discovery of an ancient artifact unleashes an evil force, Ghostbusters new and old must unite to protect their home and save the world from a second ice age.

The rich world-building combined with the well-developed characters and meaningful conflict, Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire will whisk you away to an immersive world of frozen landscapes and ancient ruins. Relying, not only on CGI, but incorporating practical effects gives the movie a sense of depth and naturalism. Concerning the practical effects–which I wish it had relied upon more–but I digress, I loved the moments with Slimer (and another bookish apparition) because Slimer was back in all his optical effects glory (for the most part anyway). It was like being transported back to the original Ghostbusters to greet the lovable menace. While not practical, we do get moments with the Staypuff marshmallowies too!

A surprising narrative strength demonstrated by the movie is its thematic depth. Through interpersonal conflict, the movie explores rich themes such as redemption, the challenges of growing up, and hubris. While the outside/action plot is a classic good vs evil setup, the inside/emotional story delivers many substantive layers that enrich the humanity of the characters and the story itself. The movie’s deceptively simplistic packaging surrounds a complex narrative that keeps the audience engaged.

One of the character-driven subplots of the movie provides a great opportunity to explore isolation and loneliness even when surrounded by people. Humans are designed to desire companionship, whether that companionship is romantic or platonic. And I appreciate the movie exploring what it’s like to feel alone within your on family. On the topic of family, the movie also provides an exploration on one’s family of origin and one’s found family.

For all it’s spooky hilarity, Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire is a family melodrama that touches your heart whilst the more thrilling elements of the movie seek to wildly entertain you.

Ryan teaches Film Studies and Screenwriting at the University of Tampa and is a member of the Critics Association of Central Florida and Indie Film Critics of America. If you like this article, check out the others and FOLLOW this blog! Interested in Ryan making a guest appearance on your podcast or contributing to your website? Send him a DM on Twitter. If you’re ever in Tampa or Orlando, feel free to catch a movie with him.

Follow him on Twitter: RLTerry1 and LetterBoxd: RLTerry

FIVE NIGHTS AT FREDDY’S horror movie review

Posted on by
Reply

Fun-filled and creepy! Blumhouse’s Five Nights at Freddy’s is surprisingly good! From the unnerving atmosphere to the practical effects, it’s entertaining and even thoughtful with its exploration of childhood trauma. However, for everything I liked about the movie, I do feel that it should have leaned a little more heavily into Gremlins or Chopping Mall territory because it is a little too serious at times. All in all, the movie is smartly written, with just the right amount of suspension of disbelief. There are even influences of Nightmare on Elm Street and Freddy Krueger’s MO in this movie. If you’re looking for a entertaining time to spend at the cinema on this weekend before Halloween, then you can’t go wrong with Five Nights. After watching the movie, I will now be anticipating Universal Orlando & Hollywood to feature this house at next year’s Halloween Horror Nights.

A troubled security guard begins working at Freddy Fazbear’s Pizzeria. While spending his first night on the job, he realizes the late shift at Freddy’s won’t be so easy to make it through.

I had no idea what to expect since I knew very little about the game. In fact, when I first heard of the game many years ago, I thought it was about the Freddy–Freddy Krueger. Nope. The game is about surviving an abandoned not Chuck-E-Cheese. It’s been probably twenty or more years since I’ve been to a Chuck-E-Cheese–come to think of it–I think the last time I went was when it was known as Showbiz Pizza. When I think of environments and settings that would be naturally creepy whether abandoned or not, Chuck-E-Cheese is one of them. I would imagine that on any given Tuesday night, a Chuck-E-Cheese is unnerving, let alone if it was haunted.

Since I’ve never played the game, I will not be commenting on the translation from interactive media to cinema, but from what I have learned, there is a lot of lore in the game, so I hope that lore is what was brought into the movie version.

Five Nights at Freddy’s benefits from a small cast and few locations. Furthermore, what the movie lacks in the screenwriting department, it makes up for in Emma Tammi’s directing. That’s not to suggest that it is poorly written–quite the contrary–I like how well it was written, given that it’s adapted from a video game and written for (primarily) teens that played the game as kids. Reminds me of a more mature version of Are You Afraid of the Dark? or Goosebumps. As much fun as I had with the movie, I feel that it could’ve used a little more camp in the storytelling–the movie would have benefitted from channeling Gremlins or Chopping Mall to bump up the dark humor and playfulness. The plot is simple and our central character is complex–the recipe for solid cinematic storytelling!

Our central character of Mike (Josh Hutcherson) is relatable, and his behavior feels natural considering the trauma of his younger brother being kidnapped when they were kids. The devastation of the loss of his brother, and later mother and father, has gravely impacted his ability to manage his own life and younger sister (and this is where the movie should’ve made her his daughter because a 20+ year age difference is a little hard to buy). Facing the loss of custody of his little sister to his overbearing, condescending aunt (played by Fried Green Tomatoes‘ Mary Stuart-Masterson), he must survive nights as a security guard at Freddy’s to prove he can care for his little sister. Within the first few minutes of the movie, we have our central character, their external goal, and opposition to the goal. I love when I witness established screenwriting conventions followed–because they work!

While the movie depicts very little on-screen violence and little to no gore, it successfully transfers that fear from the screen into the mind of the audience. That which is suggested in image association or shadow is more terrifying than witnessing it plainly on screen. By keeping most of the violence, death, and gore off-screen, and the adult language to a minimum, this movie works as a gateway horror for older kids and teens that are considering diving into the genre.

The setting is fantastic! I don’t know whether this was an abandoned Showbiz Pizza or Chuck-E-Cheese in real life or not–hope it was–but the setting is ominous and creepy! And because it’s representative of places in real life, it’s easy to imagine ourselves in the same environment. Perhaps it’s not as unnerving as being stalked in your own home like in Halloween or When a Stranger Calls, but there is definitely something naturally scary about being trapped with kids’ toys and animatronic characters at night in a setting haunted by ghosts of its glory days.

I also appreciate the practical effects, puppetry, and character performer costuming in the movie. While I imagine that it’s a combination of CGI and practical, I kept studying the animatronic characters to determine whether it was character performers in costume or of it was exceptionally good CGI–so much so I feel that I could reach out and touch the fur. Had the CGI been overt, then the scares would’ve been far less terrifying as CGI rarely packs the same punch as actors reacting to real props, costuming, and effects.

You’ll not be disappointed if you chose to watch Five Nights at Freddy’s this weekend. Go in with an open mind, and just enjoy a fun horror movie! Don’t overthink it, just be entertained by it!

Ryan teaches Film Studies and Screenwriting at the University of Tampa and is a member of the Critics Association of Central Florida and Indie Film Critics of America. If you like this article, check out the others and FOLLOW this blog! Interested in Ryan making a guest appearance on your podcast or contributing to your website? Send him a DM on Twitter. If you’re ever in Tampa or Orlando, feel free to catch a movie with him.

Follow him on Twitter: RLTerry1 and LetterBoxd: RLTerry

THE EXORCIST: BELIEVER horror movie review

Posted on by
Reply

The Exorcist: Caricature. Believer? How’s about unBelievably bonkers. The soulless derivative sequel to the original Friedkin masterpiece manages to be everything and nothing simultaneously. It’s a bastardization of the source material that demonstrates a gross lack of understanding on so many narrative and theological levels. Honestly, this movie could easily be Scary Movie 6.66 because of how unintentionally laughable it is. The characters are flat, the plot is all over the place, the tone is criminally uneven, and it’s disrespectful of the thoughtfulness of the original at every chance it gets. Representation matters. If David Gordon Green did not have plans to respectfully (albeit creatively) represent spiritual warfare and demonic possession, then he should’ve chosen another property to destroy.

When his daughter, Angela, and her friend Katherine, show signs of demonic possession, it unleashes a chain of events that forces single father Victor Fielding to confront the nadir of evil. Terrified and desperate, he seeks out Chris MacNeil, the only person alive who’s witnessed anything like it before.

I saw a comment on Twitter today calling for a petition to keep Green away form the horror genre, and I concur. Other than his surprisingly good Halloween H40, he has proven to be inept when helming a legacy horror project. William Friedkin’s The Exorcist remains the definitive possession film. While Friedkin was critical of the new religious right in the 1970s, he was still respectful of the rite of exorcism; he crafted a cinematic story about loss of innocence, crisis of faith, overcoming fear, the limitations of science, and the obstacles of religious bureaucracy. But at the end of the day, the film was grounded in Christianity wherein we find the rite of exorcism. Similar practices may be observed in other cultures and religions, but if you’re going to depict the rite of exorcism specifically, then the story needs to be respectful of and grounded in Christianity–not become a mockery of.

Ellen Burstyn is completely wasted in this film, and her character is in no way connected to the Chris MacNeil in the original. Last we say her, she underwent a journey of faith, going from someone mostly agnostic to someone that believed in the existence and power of God after the events of the original Exorcist. Now, she has no belief system and is rather laissez fair about faith, exorcism, and the like. She is a character without any conviction, therefore she has no drive and lacks spiritual grounding in any real sense of truth. If what you believe doesn’t matter, then there is no urgency to believe or batter personal demons in order to battle the real demon in the possessed girls. Furthermore, if it really doesn’t matter what one believes than it devalues all belief systems. Just because you don’t believe doesn’t mean it’s any less true. Besides the hodgepodge of MacNeil’s worldview, her character is greatly lacking in any dimension that would even help to hint at some modicum of compelling character.

When a movie tries to be everything to everyone, then it becomes about nothing and is for no one.

The cardboard character profile isn’t limited to Chris MacNeil, all the characters in this movie are lacking in anything that would make them compelling for the audience. I cared not whether any of the characters lived or died. Personally, I would have preferred the demon win and kill all the useless, lifeless characters. Although, that would only interest the nameless demon if the characters (or this film) had a soul. As it stands, the film and characters therein are soulless. Speaking of the demon being nameless, this is in direct conflict with the rite of exorcism. Whether one chooses to believe the demon possession (is incredibly rare but) real, the demon always has to be named, because having the demon’s name gives the exorcist power over the demon. The least Green could have done is give the demon a name. We are led to believe that it may be Pazuzu, because it recognizes MacNeil, but the name is never uttered by any character.

I found the movie unintentionally funny. With a few tweaks, it could have easily been Scary Movie 6.66. The plot and characters are just so unrealistic and ridiculous that the story and experience plays out at comedic proportions. Moments that were supposed to be scary were funny, moments that were supposed to be empowering were ludicrous, and the showdown was something straight out of Avengers: End Game. The Exorcist: Believer is Avengers meets The Rite meets a SyFy Channel original movie. The only meaningful connection this movie has to the original is the name, Ellen Burstyn, and a brief vomit-inducing cameo by Linda Blair. I’ve seen many other possession films that were way more interesting, entertaining, and thoughtful than this one.

Do yourself a favor, and if choose to watch this travesty, you should rewatch the original to cleanse your cinematic spirit of the demon that this movie will force upon you. While I suspected Halloween Horror Nights at Universal Orlando featured the The Exorcist: Believer house as a means to get people interested in the movie, clearly it was a move to compensate for how bad this movie really is. If it wasn’t for the house, I imagine far fewer people would want to see this abysmal use of a legacy intellectual property.

Ryan teaches Film Studies and Screenwriting at the University of Tampa and is a member of the Critics Association of Central Florida and Indie Film Critics of America. If you like this article, check out the others and FOLLOW this blog! Interested in Ryan making a guest appearance on your podcast or contributing to your website? Send him a DM on Twitter. If you’re ever in Tampa or Orlando, feel free to catch a movie with him.

Follow him on Twitter: RLTerry1 and LetterBoxd: RLTerry