Coventry Reviews

Five Minutes to Live (1961)

She has five minutes to live, while he has seventy-five minutes to chatter, sing and play the guitar!

[5/10 · 19 April 2024]

It's typically Johnny Cash that he, still at the start of a promising and successful career, nevertheless stars as a loathsome and merciless villain in this low-budgeted thriller. That's just who he was: a rebel, and a stubborn and quirky one to boot! How many country singers at the verge of their breakthrough do you know who would depict a mean thug who shoots his mistress in cold blood, assaults a petrified housewife, or uses a small child as living shield?

"Five Minutes to Live" is not a very good film, but it's a worthwhile and remarkable thriller for several reasons. Johnny Cash, obviously, even though his acting skills are mediocre at best and the title song isn't exactly an earworm classic. More noteworthy is the fact this is a still relatively early example of a home-invasion thriller; - and a rather brutal one. Possibly inspired by "The Desperate Hours", starring Humphrey Bogart, "Five Minutes to Live" stars Cash as trigger-happy crook Cabot who holds a housewife hostage while his partner sits at the bank where her husband works and demands $70,000. The partner doesn't use a gun or violence but threatens that Cabot will execute his wife if he doesn't pay up. Complications arise when the husband was apparently planning to run off with his mistress, and the phoneline is constantly occupied by callers from the local Ladies' Club.

The concept is original and ensures there are a handful of suspenseful moments. Still, even at barely 80 minutes of running time, "Five Minutes to Live" feels overlong and too many extended parts exist solely of Johnny Cash chatting with the woman or singing the title song (though only the first two-three sentences) while jamming on his guitar. The acting, as said, is poor. It must be quite embarrassing for the ensemble cast when the best performance comes from 7-year-old Ron "Ronnie" Howard!

The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997)

T-Rex Double T-Rouble

[4/10 · 19 April 2024]

Confession time! Never-ever have I watched "The Lost World: Jurassic Park" before. Sounds difficult to believe, but I was so overwhelmed and deeply impressed by the original "Jurassic Park" when I first saw it at age 12 in the cinema, that - back in 1993 already - I decided that nothing could ever surpass the experience. I never watched parts 2 and 3 but started again with the "Jurassic World" movies as per 2015. Since the most recent one - "Dominion" - was so terribly awful, I figured I might as well watch the older sequels too.

The good news is that "The Lost World" isn't as awful as "Dominion", for sure. The bad news: it's bad and undoubtedly the worst piece of work that Spielberg has ever put to the table (yes, including "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull").

Let it be clear, though, the special effects and dinosaur creatures obviously still look amazing. If you were crazy about the T-Rex from the original (and who wasn't?), there are now two T-Rexes plus a little one! While we're mentioning the strong points, there also are a few nail-bitingly suspenseful and incredibly spectacular sequences, like when Julianne Moore falls - seemingly painful - on the windshield of a camper, which subsequently starts cracking while hanging hundred meters above a stormy and rocky ocean.

The problem simply is the script that contains too many utterly implausible and exaggeratedly ridiculous twists and turns. A 12-year-old girl joining a supposedly well-planned and hi-tech excursion as a surprise-stowaway? I don't buy it. Battling a vicious Raptor using gymnastic tricks? Are you serious, Steven? Preferring the jaws of Tyrannosaur of the ticklish feeling of a snake in your shirt? Get out of here! Finally, can someone please explain how the T-Rex locked itself back in the below cage after devouring everybody aboard the vessel?!? Jeff Goldblum's Dr. Malcolm character was so cool in 1993, but he's dreadfully annoying here, and it seriously isn't normal that I liked the arrogant hunters (Postlethwaite and Stormare) the most. By the time our T-Rex goes on an old-fashioned and "Godzilla"-like rampage in San Diego, I had long given up on "The Lost World" and melancholically drifted off thinking how great and effective simple the original "Jurassic World" was.

The Enforcer (1976)

Dirty-Harrying by the Numbers

[4/10 · 19 April 2024]

"The Dead Pool" (fifth and final entry) is generally considered as the worst in the "Dirty Harry" franchise, but personally I think "The Enforcer" (which is number three) is just as weak or perhaps even weaker. I can think of a few reasons to clarify why this is a major step down from the previous two. The original "Dirty Harry" was a landmark of raw and violent 70s cinema, but also a hugely controversial film at the time of its release. Its authenticity and shock-impact simply cannot be equaled and, moreover, the sequels had to milden the criticism towards the police system and depict protagonist slightly less as a derailed and semi-psychopathic law enforcer. "Magnum Force" is already a lot softer, and "The Enforcer" even more so. Also, by 1976, there was an overload of brutal & unorthodox cop action movies and thrillers; - ironically spawned by the success of "Dirty Harry" five years earlier.

But, most importantly, "The Enforcer" mainly suffers from the weak and uninspired direction by James Fargo. It's perfectly acceptable that Fargo doesn't have the same directing capacities and talents as Don Siegel or Clint Eastwood himself, but he approaches "The Enforcer" too much as a tribute to the previous directors and seemingly doesn't dare to put his own stamp on the film. Too many sequences look and feel as recycled moments from "Dirty Harry" and "Magnum Force".

Just when you think peace and quiet has returned in San Francisco, Dt. Callahan is up against a dangerously deranged band of ex-combat veterans that have stolen half a warehouse of explosives and threaten to blow up the city. Harry has also been sanctioned again, due to his rather robust handling of a liquor store robbery, and to infuriate him even more he gets assigned a new female partner because the media-attention loving mayor wants more diversity on the streets.

The best things I can write about "The Enforcer" is that it contains a handful of explicitly and juicily violent executions and gunfights (but, again, many 70s flicks did) and that Clint Eastwood is as cool as ever. Tyne Daly's performance as his partner is quite good as well, but the role is clichéd, and she must sacrifice herself to proof she's a tough cop. "Sudden Impact" is the only one left in the series I have yet to see, and I hope it'll be better with Clint himself at the steering wheel.

The Deep Dark (2023)

Deep in the underground is where genuine horror lives...

[7/10 · 19 April 2024]

First, maybe a little word on the original French title "Gueules Noires", which is very different from the international title "The Deep Dark" and can roughly be translated as "Black Snouts". It refers to how the hard and devastating work in the mining industry makes every person equal. Regardless of what race you are, or what skin color you have, working underground in the mines makes everyone's face black with dirt.

"The Deep Dark" is a prime example of the type of horror in which the French are specialized. Raw, sinister, unpleasant, and relentless terror with exclusively unsympathetic characters and without the slightest bit of comic relief. Pure and genuine horror, in other words, and I - for one - love it (despite several flaws).

In the 1850s, in Northern France, 27 miners tragically die when the shafts collapse shortly after they made an archeologically groundbreaking but deeply disturbing discovery. 100 years later, in the same mine, a versatile group of miners is forced to accompany an arrogant anthropologist down the shafts, because he's convinced the deep underground layers hide evidence of a previously undiscovered civilization. They find a new civilization, all right, but its deity turns out to be a terrifying and invincible monster.

The script of "The Deep Dark" certainly isn't without holes or massively implausible plot elements, but you simply got to love the grim atmosphere and claustrophobic tension that writer/director Mathieu Turi creates. And the monster, of course! I have seen thousands of horror movies, and I guarantee the monster of this film is one of coolest and most jaw-droppingly astounding ones of the last two or three decades. The creature is also as violent and bloodthirsty as it looks, which results in a handful of excessively gruesome deaths and make-up effects that are not meant for squeamish viewers. Highly recommended to true horror junkies.

The Soul Eater (2024)

Intense and compelling French folklore/mystery

[7/10 · 19 April 2024]

Rarely before in the history of horror cinema, one director (or a directors duo in this case) made such an impressive debut than Alexandre Bustillo and Julien Maury with "À L'intérieur" (aka "Inside"). That film is - hands down - one of the most forceful, shocking, astounding, and nightmarish horror flicks ever made. It is also why I have been and will continue following these directors in whatever they do, even though thus far they were never able to repeat the brilliance of their debut. "Aux Yeux des Vivants" (aka "Among the Living") is another authentically raw and disturbing effort, and their Hollywood ventures "Leatherface" and "The Deep House" are more than adequate, but the true genius of "À L'intérieur" has yet to be equaled.

"Le Mangeur d'Âmes" (aka "The Soul Eater") certainly isn't a masterpiece, neither, but nevertheless another professionally made, compelling, suspenseful, and frequently unsettling thriller worth seeking out. The main difference between this movie and Bustillo & Maury's previous films (except "Leatherface") is that they are not working from a screenplay they wrote themselves, but from a novel adaptation. It's also more of a murder mystery and thriller instead of a genuine shock-horror film, but rest assured there still a handful of nauseating moments to enjoy.

When the gruesome death of a married couple in a remote little French mountain town seems somehow connected to a series of unsolved children's disappearance cases, two different police superiors are sent in to investigate. The embittered Elizabeth Guardiano must try and understand the couple's bizarre death, while gendarme Franck de Roland is obsessively searching for answers regarding the missing children. In the creepy town, where nobody really wants to cooperate and where more strange things have happened lately, there exists an old folklore tale about a horned creature that feeds on children's souls. But, surely, two mature police officers can't believe local legends, right?

"The Soul Eater" is not highly original, but the story contains a couple of unforeseen twists (one of which funnily reminded me of the recent "Cocaine Bear") and there are many vile supportive characters to keep the suspense at a high level. Bustillo & Maury once again prove themselves masters in using the ominous French landscapes and old buildings to keep you fascinated, and the excellent cast (particularly the amazing Virginie Ledoyen) give away dedicated performances. I can understand why some people refer to "The Soul Eater" as a standard and forgettable type of thriller, but I think there are plenty of reasons to enjoy it.

Your Monster (2024)

Rom-Monster-Com

[4/10 · 17 April 2024]

Being an open-minded and tolerant movie fan, or at least trying to be, I believe that good combos and crossbreeding of all genres are possible. Often very difficult, but possible. Mixing a romantic comedy with a monster horror movie? It's not very likely, but sure, why not. What about a mix of rom-com and monster horror, with musical aspirations thrown in? Err, I suppose...

Nope, I must be honest, I didn't like "Your Monster" at all. I thought it was dull, silly, derivative, predictable, not funny, and not nearly featuring enough horror. Then again, it might just not be my thing and I'm not the target audience. At the Brussels' International Film Festival, where the film had its world premiere, it seemed as if there were many people who enjoyed it.

You'd think the film is similar to "Beauty and the Beast", but it's actually much more reminiscent to - believe it or not - "Fight Club". Of course, by mentioning that title I'm already revealing the big twist, but it's really quite obvious throughout the entire movie (but still the reason why I'm adding a spoiler alert).

In a Violent Nature (2024)

Chris Nash, DO NOT EVER direct again. Please!

[2/10 · 16 April 2024]

If you're a horror fanatic, and your hobby is attending world premieres at bizarre and eccentric genre festivals, you regularly encounter misfires or even downright bad movies. It's inevitable. The trick is to be mild and open-minded, and to look for a few inventive ideas and brief highlights in each film. That usually works when you're an overall tolerant person, ... except in the case of "In A Violent Nature". This film is just irredeemably and infuriatingly awful.

Apparently, writer/director Chris Nash had the brilliant (on paper, perhaps) idea to make a raw back-to-basics 'killer in the woods' slasher movie, but - and here it comes - from the perspective of the heavily disfigured, intellectually underdeveloped, and undead killer. Now, I know what you're thinking. "That actually sounds quite cool". Well, no. Be mindful the gimmick means you're basically just watching how a freak endlessly walks through the woods, makes circles around the cabin, and gazes at teens around the campfire. And I do mean endlessly! 75-80% of the running time is not an exaggeration. The remaining 20% is even duller, though. Old ladies nagging about bears, dumb kids remaining at the massacre site instead of running as far away as possible, and idiotic Rangers staring at the temporarily beaten body of the psycho instead of shooting it full of bullets or hacking it up to pieces.

The only reason why I give one extra point is because there are a handful of creative and excessively gore massacres. Notably the industrial lumberjack-device kill and the sequence in which a poor girl's head is pulled through her own stomach via a meat hook (don't ask...) are impressive. The supreme make-up effects shouldn't come as a surprise since Chris Nash previously worked as effect wizard for films like "Psycho Goreman" and "The Void". He should continue this line of work, and never ever attempt to write or direct another movie himself.

Abigail (2024)

Don't come closer, tiny dancer!

[6/10 · 13 April 2024]

The Radio Silence collective, and directors Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett in particular, don't take a lot of time off. After releasing two "Scream" sequels in as many years, they're back again with an original tale, similar to (and practically as good as) their previous hit "Ready or Not". "Abigail" isn't a masterpiece of cinema, nor is it the most innovative or best vampire movie in history, but it's massively entertaining to watch; - especially together with an outrageous crowd of horror fanatics (like I did at the Brussels International Film Festival).

"Abigail" starts off with a clichéd premise. A group of criminals that don't know each other, and each with their own area of expertise, are brought together for a special assignment. They must kidnap the ballet-dancing daughter of a wealthy person and babysit her for 24 hours until daddy pays the ransom. The kidnapping went easy, and the babysitting is supposedly the easiest part because - honestly - what could a 12-year-old girl in a cute tutu do against six heavily armed and professional criminals, right?

After the derivative but mandatory first half hour (criminals showing off, traumatic background stories, pinky swears, ...) "Abigail" turns into a fast-paced and gore-soaked horror crowd pleaser with funny one-liners and superior make-up effects. The vampires don't look like traditional counts in cloaks, but more like demons with filthy teeth and blood red eyes. There are good performances from familiar faces (Kevin Durand, Dan Stevens, Kathryn Newton) and particularly the young Alisha Weir is impressive as the titular monster in her uncanny ballet dress. Good splatter fun, nothing more but certainly nothing less.

Close Your Eyes (2002)

When I snap my fingers, you may enjoy your next cigarette...

[3/10 · 11 April 2024]

"Close Your Eyes", "Doctor Sleep" and "Hypnotic". How is it possible that a thriller has three different a.k.a. Titles, and all three of them are boring?! And how can you set high expectations for a supposedly compelling serial-killer flick if all three titles (and the DVD-cover, and the cast list).

"Hypnotic" - I'll go with the title on the DVD that I borrowed from a friend - is one of the most uninteresting and slowest moving thrillers I had the displeasure of viewing. The uncharismatic Goran Visnjic stars as an uncertified hypnotist specialized in helping people to quit smoking. When he "sees" the image of a drowning girl in the thoughts of a female police officer, she promptly recruits him to work on an unresolvable case. Her supervisors think it's a terrible idea, and they are right, but allow her to continue nevertheless. The hypnotist becomes obsessed with the case, satanists are involved, and blah blah.

Dull beyond words, overlong, completely devoid of thrills and/or gore, and every single cast member looks & behaves as if they didn't want to be part of this project. Admittedly, I was already half asleep by the third act, but from the looks of it, the climax was preposterous (shapeshifting, evil reincarnated, etc.). The plot of this film is even dumber than the idea of quitting to smoke via hypnosis therapy.

Last Straw (2023)

Today's specials: idiocy and randomness!

[3/10 · 11 April 2024]

"Last Straw" premiered at the Brussels' International Fantastic Film Festival, at the main screen at around 10PM, and that used to mean something. Not even too many years ago, only quality horror films/thrillers with the potential to become cult classics played here. "Last Straw" offers everything but quality. The host at the BIFFF already warned the audience, though. He said: it'll be fun, it'll be gore, but you will have forgotten about it 15 minutes after you walk out of the theater. Well, I think he was far too gentle. It wasn't fun, it really wasn't that gore, and I want to forget about it as soon as possible.

The script has three insurmountable defaults: unoriginal, idiotic, and totally random. The plot revolves around a young and troubled waitress who must survive the night in a sloppy roadside diner while besieged from the outside by evil perpetrators with uncanny masks. How special; - I can at least think of half a dozen movies with the exact same premise. Secondly, and even more irritating, ALL characters are incredibly dumb and do the utmost random and illogical things. It's quite a challenge to point out who's the most loathsome and implausible character. The burger-flipper who transforms into a stone-cold killer, the kitchen help who doesn't realize that it's totally normal that his fingerprints are all over the place, the police officer who deliberately brings a person in danger by taking her outside for no apparent reason, or the lead girl herself who doesn't do anything right.

When Michael Calls (1972 TV Movie)

I just call ... to say ... I haunt you!

[5/10 · 10 April 2024]

Early 70s TV-thriller stars a young (or younger, at least) Michael Douglas, but he's not the titular Michael who makes sinister prank calls. Douglas stars as Craig, the brother of Michael who - suddenly and out of the blue - calls up his auntie Helen in panic to say that he's lost and can't find his way home. That doesn't sound too abnormal, except for the little fact that Michael is presumed dead for 15 years already! Michael ran off after his mother was put in a mental institute (where she quickly committed suicide) and custody of her two sons was given to auntie Helen. He got lost in a blizzard and never returned, but now Michael apparently found a phone in the afterlife. The already fragile Helen is terrified, obviously, but luckily her ex-husband Doremus (what kind of name is that?) and Craig approach the mystery rather rationally and investigate further.

Solid, captivating premise based on a novel by John Farris ("The Fury", "Dear Dead Delilah") and perfectly fit for a TV-thriller, and this in spite of the reasonably predictable outcome, the overuse of clichés, and the lack of genuine surprises. The first half hour is strong and contains two noteworthy death sequences, one involving bees and another - quite shocking - one during a school play.

I will always watch whatever early 70s made-for-television thriller that I can. They usually depart from intriguing and original ideas, and somehow always maintain a bleak and sinister atmosphere throughout. Moreover, they're always short and often available for free on YouTube! Apart from Michael Douglas, "When Michael Calls" also stars Ben Gazzara, whom I personally consider a strong and undeservedly underrated actor.

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire (2024)

Even Nostalgia has an expiration date...

[5/10 · 9 April 2024]

You didn't have to summon the ghost of Nostradamus to be able and predict that the successful "Ghostbusters: Afterlife" would quickly lead to another sequel, and maybe even a completely new series. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed that 2021 comeback film, but it was basically everything that Hollywood loves the most: big financial profit through minimal creative effort. Everybody wanted to see the new generation of ghostbusters team up with the original members. Everybody loves nostalgia; - including me.

But the second "legacy sequel" - apparently that's what they call this type of films - already painfully makes clear that even nostalgia has an expiration date. "Frozen Empire" simply isn't very good. The plot blindly follows the structure of all the previous films, and popular gimmicks/fixed values are dragged in purely for nostalgia, but they aren't adding any value (like the Slimer-creature, the little marshmallow-men, and even Bill Murray himself).

Like in the old days, Ghostbusters proves that people - and inhabitants of New York in particular - are ungrateful hypocrites suffering from continuous memory loss. Despite having saved the city three times already, the Ghostbusters are only blamed for reckless behavior and receive lawsuits for destroying half of the city whenever they go out to bust a ghost or creature. The familiar looking mayor even wants to shut them down permanently. Meanwhile, a new and almighty evil creature manifests itself through an ancient artifact and patiently awaits the right time to turn NY into the titular frozen empire. Its name is Garraka, and this malignant ice deity is by far the biggest reason to seek out the new "Ghostbusters" movie, as it's imposing and genuinely uncanny.

It certainly isn't a punishment to watch this new entry in the 40-year-old franchise. Paul Rudd is always fun to watch, the sub plot about two melancholic teen girls - one alive and one dead - is endearing, Kumail Nanjiani has a few funny lines, and it was nice to see Dan Aykroyd in a significant role again. In the end and rationally analyzed, though, it's an unmemorable Sci-Fi/action flick of which you realize you wouldn't bother to go to the cinema for if it hadn't the "Ghostbusters" label on it.

The Boy from Hell (1988)

Demonic Dad kills your bullies!

[5/10 · 7 April 2024]

Oddball and hyper-obscure late-80s horror flick that is perhaps not highly memorable, but at least very entertaining while it lasts. The story doesn't make much sense, but it's strangely compelling and keeps you curious. A satanist father pursues his son Daniel into an institute for troubled teenagers - where his mother hid him - and takes possession of his body. Being demonically possessed has advantages, though, as you can joyfully set bullies on fire or throw them into a woodchipper just by using telekinetic powers! There isn't much suspense, but the gore and the make-up effects are surprisingly decent, and there are reasonably good acting performances from teenage beauty Alexandra Kennedy and Linda Hamilton look-alike Twink Kaplan. I probably won't remember anything about "The Boy from Hell" in six months from now, but I wasn't bored or annoyed at any moment.

Jurassic Park (1993)

30+ years later, still breathtaking...

[9/10 · 7 April 2024]

There's nothing - absolutely nothing - that I can write down in a review for "Jurassic Park" that hasn't been said or printed thousands of times before. Spielberg's (and Crichton's) landmark is three decades old already, but still one of the most influential and inspirational movie-adventures ever made. This wonderful website alone holds nearly 1.500 praising reviews, it launched an incredibly popular franchise and countless of rip-offs, and since 1993 every kid in the world plays with dinosaur toys thanks to this film. "Jurassic Park" remains fantastic Sci-Fi/action entertainment, even after the 20th viewing.

Oh wait, maybe there is something useful I can add! About the timelessness of "Jurassic Park". Yours truly is one of those annoying film-freaks who imposes his childhood favorites onto his own children, and I deeply desire that my offspring loves my favorites as much as I do. But with practically every film that I show to my children (aged 8 and 14), I always get the same comments: "Dad, this movie is so old". "Those special effects look so fake". "This is boring". Well, there was none of that during "Jurassic Park". More than 30 years after the special effects and dino-designs astounded 12-year-old me at the cinema, they still astound my demanding kids via the TV-screen. "Jurassic Park" is a classic that defies several generations, and there certainly aren't movies that can do that.

Knock Knock (I) (2015)

All men are easy & weak. Point taken.

[5/10 · 7 April 2024]

My guess is that 95-98% of all heterosexual men, happily married or not, will do the exact same thing as Keanu Reeves' character in "Knock Knock". Heck, I even think it took a long time before he gave in. I would, if I'm honest, be a defenseless prey as well. You just don't say no when two girls with the looks of Ana de Armas and Lorena Izzo are standing naked in your bathroom, soaped up and promising it'll remain "our little secret".

So then, what is the point "Knock Knock" is trying to make? That all men are easy and weak preys? Okay, point taken. Or perhaps the point is that you can't keep unfaithfulness secret? Or maybe there isn't a point to make, and Eli Roth simply wanted to show how hot and sexy his wife Lorena Izzo is.

"Knock Knock" is a remake of the obscure but original & entertaining "Death Game" from 1977, starring Colleen Camp and Seymour Cassel. Evan Webber (Keanu Reeves) is home alone on Father's Day, as his artist wife and two kids are spending the weekend at the beach. Evan obviously loves his family because the house is full of adorable photos of the four of them. Seriously, I have never seen so many family photos in one house. It's almost sickening. Evan also really tries hard to resist when two stranded (and insanely beautiful) girls show up at his doorstep and literally throw themselves at his feet, but his resistance eventually breaks, and Evan experiences a hot threesome in his bath -and bedroom! Was it all worth it? Of course not! The next morning, Bell and Genesis refuse to leave, turn into stalkers, and their behavior gets more psychotic with each hour that passes, until they even set up a fake trial against poor tied up Evan.

If it was Eli Roth's intention to make a nail-bitingly tense and disturbing home-invasion thriller, I'm sorry to say that he failed. "Knock Knock" never becomes suspenseful, probably due to the mediocre acting performances and the implausible plot. Especially compared to similarly themed films (like "Funny Games" or "The Strangers"), it's a rather weak and forgettable effort with only two highlights: sex in the shower - duh! - and Pixies on the soundtrack.

The Suckers (1972)

The proof of the pudding is in the ... title!

[3/10 · 5 April 2024]

The makers of this drive-in exploitation disaster probably want us to refer to their film as another version of the almighty cult/thriller monument "The Most Dangerous Game". No way, though, as it's truly way too much honor to mention the name of that immortal classic in the same paragraph as this dud. "The Suckers" is nothing more than a dull and monotonous sex film; - absolutely nothing. A typically early 70s sex flick, I may add, because the women are incredibly beautiful and perfectly curved whereas the males are filthy pigs with beer bellies and hairy backs.

Three hot models, their agent, and a notorious big game hunter are lured to the estate of a sleazy millionaire named Vandermeer, supposedly for a totally new and innovative kind of hunting party. The first 55 minutes purely exist of overlong and dreadfully unexciting softcore sex sequences, and during the final 20 minutes there's a little bit of action and a disgusting rape sequence. Trust your instinct and the warning in the title on this one: it genuinely sucks.

Busting (1974)

Underrated but terrific 70s buddy-cop thriller

[7/10 · 5 April 2024]

In the early 70s, and more particularly in the years after the tremendous success of Clint Eastwood's action-landmark "Dirty Harry", there were several movies about tough and robust cops disobeying their superiors and using harshly unorthodox methods to bring down criminals that were always abusing the weak justice system. Although none of these movies are as iconic as Don Siegel's "Dirty Harry" or William Friedkin's "The French Connection", quite a few of them are intriguing and unjustly forgotten, like "Badge 383", "Fuzz", or "Busting".

This was one of the first efforts of the multi-talented but shamefully underrated writer/director Peter Hyams. Hyams is at his best when he's working from his own screenplays. "Capricorn One" and "Outland" are his best, but "Busting" as well is a really clever, genuinely funny, and terrifically made R-rated buddy cop/exploitation thriller. The chemistry between lead actors Elliot Gould and Robert Blake is splendid, depicting two LA vice squad officers. Their modus operandi is always the same. Keneely (Gould) provokes, which always works smoothly since he also genuinely looks like a sleaze bag with his big moustache and messy hair, and then Farrell (Blake) joins for the arrest. They intend to bring down the prostitution & sex clubs imperium of local mobster Rizzo, but Rizzo is powerful and has influential friends in high places.

The tone of "Busting" is delightfully cynical throughout, and many sequences and dialogues are laugh-out-loud funny. There's also a good portion of graphic and relentless cruel violence, like a confrontation in a supermarket and a brutal retaliation by Rizzo's henchmen against our two detectives. Blake and (especially) Gould own the film, but there are also excellent supportive roles for Michael Lerner, Allen Garfield, cult-icon Sid Haig, and the unearthly beautiful Cornelia Sharpe.

Seven Days from Now (1957)

... And the worst is yet to come!

[7/10 · 4 April 2024]

What does misery loves? Company! Large company! Twenty-six people in a lifeboat that is only meant for nine people type of large company. The voice-over at the beginning of the film stoically announces how more than 1.200 people died in the explosion of an ocean cruise liner (after it hit a sea-mine), and only 37 people survived. 26 of them desperately hold on to a small lifeboat. It's ironic how a massive amount of people died in the explosion, but the small group of survivors is still too large to actually survive the aftermath. Because the cliche is true, the lucky ones died first.

"Seven Waves Away" (or "Abandon Ship", which is a terrible title since nobody ever wanted to abandon the ship) is a compelling adventure/drama, but also very difficult to watch because it's pure suffering from beginning to end and it depicts the absolute worst side of human behavior. The lifeboat is overcrowded, and the only chance for some people to survive is to get rid off the weaker passengers aboard. Of course, who is entitled to decide about the life or death of others, or even to determine that one person is more redundant than another?

Non-stop suspense, genuine drama, and good acting performances are what makes this a powerful and unforgettable film. It's definitely not something you should watch when already feeling a bit down or depressed, but if you seek an intense mixture between disaster movie and melodrama, "Seven Waves Away" comes highly recommended.

Dark Souls (2010)

Stop drilling holes in the script!

[3/10 · 30 March 2024]

"Dark Souls" starts out like dozens of other horror movies do, namely quite typical and straightforward, with an attractive female jogger getting killed in the woods by a psycho with a drilling device. Less typical, though, is that the girl's corpse comes back to life in the morgue and return home where she continues roaming around as a zombie and pukes up black goo. In the following month, 37 (!) similarly inexplicable murders/resurrections occur that baffle the Oslo police, and only the father of the first victim undertakes action.

Sounds intriguing, doesn't it? I thought so too, and I had reasonably high expectations for this seemingly morbid and original Norwegian horror flick, but the sad truth is that "Dark Souls" never truly takes off. The plot never surprises and there appear to be more holes in the logic and structure of the script than in the heads of the victims. There are a couple of nice gory bits, like when the prostitute in the abandoned factory receives an extra hole in her face, but the budget is too low to do much more. The pacing is slow, the entire middle-section is boring, and the conclusion is disappointing. Give it a miss.

Endangered Species (2021)

Dysfunctional families shouldn't go on Safaris...

[4/10 · 29 March 2024]

Respect for the massively entertaining movies she made more than a decade and a half ago, like "Wilderness" and "Solomon Kane", but writer/director M. J. Bassett's "Endangered Species" is a hopelessly cliched, derivative, unexciting, overly moralizing, and annoyingly digitized action/adventure thriller.

It's probably not a good idea for families that are non-stop fighting and come across as borderline dysfunctional to go on a safari-vacation in Kenya. The father has been fired from his job and can't really afford such an expensive holiday. The homosexual son desperately seeks recognition, the rebellious daughter and her boyfriend ruin the ambiance for no reason, and the diabetic mother want to uphold appearances. When they are also extremely dumb to illegally trespass a wildlife reservation and go off road, they can only blame themselves for getting trampled by rhinos, cornered by hyenas, and mauled by cheetahs.

"Endangered Species" still could have been a mindless and entertaining creature-feature, even if all the computerized animals look laughably fake, but halfway through MJ Bassett insists on turning into a requiem for nearly extinct animal. Of course, poaching is a horrendous crime, and everyone in the world (hopefully) hates relentless people that butcher animals for ivory, but being so dramatic about it totally ruins a film. The poachers don't even get the painful and bloody deaths they deserve.

FOMO (I) (2022)

Forget "likes"... How many "kills" is what really matters!

[6/10 · 26 March 2024]

Yours truly was born in the early 80s and grew up in the careless and largely anti-digital 90s. With only two blunt statements, I can illustrate that I probably wasn't part of the target audience for this film. Number one: until I looked it up, I had no idea what the title meant. Apparently, it stands for "fear of missing out" and describes a bizarre social media condition that we, nineties kids, didn't have to worry about. Number two: I honestly can't understand the phenomenon of "influencers". In my view - and I know I'm old - it's not a job, and they are the most useless people in the world. What makes anyone think he/she is important or interesting enough to share his/her thoughts and selfies with the world?

Anyway, there are nevertheless a few aspects with which "FOMO" attracted my attention. I'm a tremendous fan of old-fashioned 80s-styled horror/slasher movies, for starters, and I also have a profound fondness for movies made in my own beloved home country of Belgium (and, more particularly, in Flanders). So, when I found out "FOMO" is a combo of both, and that it revolves around dim-witted, self-centered, and disposable influencers brutally getting butchered in and around a remote cabin in the woods, I simply had to see it.

I can't quite figure out why "FOMO" has such a low rating (currently 3/10) around here. Sure, it isn't a masterpiece of cinema, but it's reasonably well-made, hugely entertaining, and - most importantly - it ticks all the mandatory boxes of a genuine slasher. There's the remote setting, a psycho with a cool mask (digital smiley-faces), nasty and blood-soaked kills (scalping, beheading, throat-slitting, bludgeoning, ...), and - as said before - clueless victims you don't really care if they live or die. Even the concept is good: the ten most popular influencers of the country are taken to a remote location, supposedly to partake in a big TV/Social Media contest. On the tour bus they are still lusciously vlogging and streaming, but at the cabin they promptly must hand over their mobile phones and the pleasant ambience rudely changes. During the "assignments", the group painfully learns they have been lured out by a deranged killer with an even bigger hatred for influencers than I do.

The set-up of "FOMO" is rather unusual. The film ends abruptly and unresolved, like many slashers do, but instead of a sequel there came four TV-episodes of approximately half an hour each. The episodes aren't mini-slasher movies, though. The tone and format change and suddenly it becomes a mix between torture-porn, crazed dysfunctional families, and sick mind-games. Personally, I like straightforward slashing a lot more, and the episodes feel quite redundant. They also haven't been added (yet?) on IMDb.

Gina (1975)

Such a lonely stripper girl in a cold textile world...

[5/10 · 26 March 2024]

After long and careful consideration, I don't see any other option than to categorize this film in the league of "interesting failures", otherwise known as the "Yes but No" category. "Gina" is a curiously compelling and unique film, but I can't possibly describe it as good or recommendable. This movie serves the weirdest combo of topics that I have ever seen; seriously. It's a harsh social drama, criticizing the harsh labor conditions and low wages of people working in contemporary textile factories in Canada, but simultaneously it also builds up towards a typically mid-70s Rape & Revenge exploitation thriller.

Gina, a strong and independent exotic dancer moves to a remote Vancouver community where everybody works in the nearby textile plant. In the bar/motel where she works and lives, Gina befriends a film crew that is shooting a documentary on the unfair working conditions at the factory, but she also gets frequently confronted with drunk, depressed, and aggressive local males.

There's an uncannily captivating atmosphere in "Gina" that keeps you glued to the screen, but there honestly isn't happening anything at all throughout the first complete hour. To illustrate this: the film features how four people play a game of pool from start to finish, or endlessly drive around on snow scooters. Only the climax becomes reasonably eventful, with a stoic gang rape and a brutal retribution aboard an abandoned ship.

(*) User-comment title inspired by the lyrics of Falco's "Jeanny"

Ratboy (1986)

Haha ha haha, poor Clint Eastwood!

[1/10 · 25 March 2024]

Let's face it, everybody who watched "Ratboy" has suffered irreparably. It's a terrible movie and I cannot imagine anyone would like it, or even be gently for in their criticism. But hey, at least all of us had to struggle through it only once and can joyously bad-mouth it on the internet. Imagine poor Clint Eastwood! Clint was in a long-term relationship with director/lead actress Sondra Loncke, so he undoubtedly had to be very gentle and careful to pass the message her movie was awful. Even worse, Clint - either voluntarily or involuntarily - produced the film via his own company Malpaso! Since he starred in, and directed, so many downright great movies Eastwood, I find it rather difficult to believe he didn't spot early in the process that "Ratboy" would become a ginormous dud.

This film is an embarrassment from every possible angle. Sondra Loncke is a horrible actress, and an even worse director. The plot is monotonous and deadly dull, and the stereotypes used in the script are infuriating. Kidnappers are dim-witted and elderly homeless men, and every black person is either a pimp or a conman. The make-up and snout of the titular character is the best aspect, but whenever he opens his mouth to speak - even when it's simply to say his name Eugene - everything is ruined again. Moral of the story: when everybody else attempts of exploit a weak and naive individual, it's okay for you to do the same.

The Doll (1962)

Please do not disturb Norman Bates when he's with his mannequin doll.

[8/10 · 21 March 2024]

Mr. Lundgren - first name unknown - is an unhealthily introvert 30-something fella who works as a night watchman in a mall and lives in a boarding house in the suburbs of Stockholm. Despite many other lively tenants and a clear romantical interest from his landlady, Lundgren is incapable to make social contact and feels incredibly lonely. After a banal robbery at his workplace, he smuggles home a mannequin doll and develops an intense (and very vivid) relationship with it. After a while, Lundgren's neighbors grow increasingly curious about the noises coming from his apartment, but also his own mental state and imagination deteriorate.

Admittedly this sounds like the premise of a trashy and tongue-in-cheek exploitation flick, but in the capable hands of director Arne Mattson ("Mannequin in Red") and thanks to a downright phenomenal performance by Per Oscarsson ("Sult"), "The Doll" became a saddening drama and a complex mental character study.

The script is undeniably influenced by "Psycho", but it certainly isn't a rip-off. Two years after the release of Hitchcock's horror monument, the only real thing that Arne Mattson copies is the mystifying persona of Norman Bates. Like Bates, Lundgren superficially seems like a privileged man. He's handsome, polite, well-dressed, independent, ... But beneath the surface there's a deeply disturbed and potentially dangerous mind in need of help.

Should you search for action or cheap horror thrills, "The Doll" will sorely disappoint you. It's slow-paced (and perhaps a tad bit overlong) but uncannily atmospheric, beautifully filmed, brilliantly acted, and compelling straight from the eerie opening song until the desolate climax.

Terror of Frankenstein (1977)

From Sweden, with a true passion for Mary Shelley

[8/10 · 20 March 2024]

People who, like me, grew up in the nineties believing Kenneth Branagh's 1994 film was the ultimate and utmost faithful adaptation of the legendary Mary Shelley novel "Frankenstein" really ought to seek out this rare but excellent Swedish/Irish co-production from 1977. Except for one or two storylines and few design details, "Victor Frankenstein" closely follows the original novel, and - moreover - it's a magnificent but sadly forgotten horror film.

I can't think of a logical reason why the film is so obscure, but I can name several reasons why it's so good and comes so highly recommended. For starters, the story that Mrs. Shelley penned down remains unique and worth telling in all its original glory. As much as I love the James Whale classic, starring the immortal Boris Karloff, or Hammer's gruesome version featuring Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee, those classics made (too) many changes to the character of Victor Frankenstein and the "creature" he resurrected. Shelley's novel, and hence the screenplay of this film, revolves around a scientist who isn't evil or megalomaniacal, but simply obsessed and blinded by ambition. Once he succeeds to bring a human corpse back from the dead, Victor abruptly realizes he isn't entitled to play God, and abandons his creation. The Monster, who never asked to exist or live in solitude, seeks revenge and murders Victor's loved ones. The fallen scientist pursues his "mistake" to the end of the world (literally, the North Pole) to destroy him. In short, there's a lot more drama and melancholy in the novel - and in this faithful adaptation - than in most "Frankenstein" film versions out there.

Also, everything about "Victor Frankenstein" looks and feels exactly right! The gloomy early 19th century setting, the atmospheric scenery and filming locations (like the morgue, Frankenstein's attic, the blind man's house...), the slow but unnerving pace, the ominous music, the cruelly nihilistic murders committed by the creature, the minimalistic but highly efficient make-up, and the sublime casting. The depiction of Frankenstein's Monster, by the great Per Oscarsson, is fantastic. He authentically looks... dead. The skin is pale, the eyes are blood-red, the lips are black, but his posture nevertheless remains imposing. Leon Vitali is also perfect as Victor Frankenstein. He's not an arrogant and all-knowing scientist/doctor, but a young and naïve student who overestimated himself and underestimated the consequences of his acts.

Of course, there are elements that could be considered as weaknesses or shortcomings. The whole resurrection process, with the electrical offloading via a kite, seems ridiculously simple and unscientific. The creature is also astonishingly eloquent, intelligent, has a phenomenal sense for orientation, and travels at the speed of light over land and water. However, I'm not sure if these illogicalities can be blamed on the film, as they may have been taken over straight from the book. I should read it again. Everyone should...