New Suburban Gothic trailer

A new red band trailer has been released for the upcoming Suburban Gothic. Directed by Richard Bates Jr, it looks like the film has retained the unique aesthetic of Bates' previous film Excision (2012), as well as a John Waters cameo, whilst adding a little more comedy. Suburban Gothic will be released later in the year, check out the trailer...

What do you think of the trailer? Have you seen excision?

The Sacrament (2014): Review

The Sacrament is a 2014 mockumentary cult film. Directed by Ti West (House of the Devil, The Innkeepers) and starring Aj Bowen (You’re Next), Joe Swanberg (You’re Next, V/H/S) and Gene Jones. The film is loosely based on the real life events of the Jonestown Massacre.

The movie is framed as an edgy documentary for popular website Vice. After filmmaker Sam (Bowen) is approached by a brother concerned that his sister may have joined a cult, he grabs cameraman Jake (Swanberg) and the three of them set off for the ambiguous location of Eden Parish. When they arrive they find the sister in question more than happy in the jungle utopia along with many other American emigrants, including many children and elderly people. However, after interviewing Father (Jones), the enigmatic leader of the cult, they realise that not everyone is as happy as they seem and that outsiders are not particularly welcome. This culminates with the majority of the cult committing suicide, either voluntarily or by force, and the documentary crew fighting for their lives to escape the isolated community.

I’ve made no secret in the past of my dislike of Ti West and his hugely overrated films but I have to say, this is his finest work to date. I really liked the format of the Vice documentary and the setting of the cult seemed somewhat fresher than your average American based horror. AJ Bowen gives a solid performance as the emotional core of the film and Gene Jones gives a mesmerising turn as the charming but sinister leader of the cult. One of the strongest elements of the film is the overwhelmingly dark and oppressive atmosphere in the final act. Although anyone familiar with the events of the Jonestown massacre will expect a pretty unhappy ending, West skilfully tips the tone from cannibal style exploitation into full on sickening horror, made all the more disturbing by the factual events that inspired the scenes.

However, there are still flaws from West’s previous works that creep into this piece, namely script and pacing. Whereas previous efforts like House of the Devil (2009) and The Innkeepers (2011) can be characterised as a lot of slow build suspense with no real payoff, The Sacrament seems to rush itss first act to get to the sinister stuff, feature a shocking climax and then end fairly abruptly. I , for one, wouldn’t have minded at all if the film had run 20-30 minutes longer to maybe accommodate a little more characterisation and backstory of the Eden Parish community. In addition to this, aside from its strong central performances I feel the film really suffers from the “actors trying really hard not to look like they’re in a found footage movie” syndrome which was seen to great effect in the infamous Devil Inside (2012). Although in fairness, the actors obviously haven’t been given a great script to work with and much of the dialogue is laughable, including Swanberg being allocated all of the “Basil exposition”.

I’m not sure if Ti West will ever make a great film but this is certainly a good film and, whilst not touching on the greatness of the suspiciously similar Sound of my voice (2011), it stands as a fairly fresh entry into the cult film canon. I’m a great defender of the found footage genre and I feel that modelling the format on a real life style of journalism also keeps things interesting enough to cover for any lack of plausibility. The Sacrament is West’s strongest overall work and fans, and non fans alike, will revel in his leap forward in directorial ability whilst retaining his signature retro-exploitation style.

*** 3 Stars

What did you think of The Sacrament? Are you a Ti West fan?

Under the Skin (2014): Review

Under the Skin is a 2014 science fiction film. Directed by Jonathan Glazer (Sexy Beast, Birth) the film stars Scarlett Johansson (Lost in Translation, The Avengers). The film is a loose adaptation of Michael Faber's 2000 novel.

The film revolves entirely around Johansson's nameless, alien seductress. Appearing as if from nowhere, the character drives aimlessly around Scotland in a transit van looking for young, impressionable men to abduct and send back to her home planet. However, after an encounter with a facially disfigured character the alien begins to feel pity and chooses to spare the man, developing a conscience within the character. This alerts her unnamed, motorcyclist overseer as she is pursued for her digression whilst also trying to comprehend the complexity of the human race.

It's fair to say this is Glazer's most experimental and arthouse film yet and plays somewhat like Species (1995) crossed with 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). However the fascinating thing is how Glazer manages to strike an odd balance between those films, being less concerned with sexiness than Species but also more coherent than Kubrick's rambling odyssey. Like most arthouse cinema the film is visually fascinating, incorporating all the weather and elements one would associate with Scotland as well as some extremely unsettling abduction sequences. Whilst there is very little plot to be getting to grips with, it doesn't seem to matter as the atmosphere and disturbing tone seem to have a hypnotic effect.

There's been a great deal of publicity surrounding the casting of Scarlett Johannson and the amount of nudity that features in the film and before seeing the film, Johannson and Glazer did seem like an odd collaboration. However, Johannsen's performance is tremendous as she perfectly conveys an emotionless and disconnected "stranger in a strange land". There was also the danger of the nudity undermining the film and perhaps being seen as exploitative of such an incredibly famous, and beautiful, actress. However, the nudity is perfectly used and often only features during the more disturbing and disorienting abduction sequences, managing to disarm Johannsen's obvious sex appeal.

The only criticism I would make is that the film does appear repetitive and extremely thin on plot at certain times, however, the startling imagery, existential concepts and Johannsen's fascinating performance did more than enough to keep me gripped. If you lean a little more towards the conceptual, metaphysical sci-fi and can see through the arthouse cliches, Under the Skin will haunt you for days.

**** 4 Stars

What did you think of Under the Skin? Do you agree with Johannson's casting?

Snowpiercer (2014): Review

Snowpiercer is a 2014 post apocalyptic film. directed by Joon Ho-Bong (The Host) and featuring an ensemble cast including Chris Evans (Sunshine), Tilda Swinton (We Need to Talk About Kevin), Kang Ho-Song (Sympathy for Mr Vengeance), John Hurt (Alien) and Jamie Bell (King Kong). The film is adapted from the French graphic novel Le Transperceneige.

Snowpiercer is set in a post-apocalyptic future in which an attempt to counter global warming has backfired and the earth has been plunged into an ice age. The only refuge from the elements is an enormous train which perpetually circles the globe and is divided into the rich and opulant classes in the front of the train and the poor and oppressed classes in the tail end. The tail end occupants are led in an uprising by Curtis (Evans), mentored by Gilliam (Hurt), in an attempt to overthrow their oppressive masters in the front carriages, under the leadership of Mr Wilfred (Ed Harris). Along the way they enlist the lockbusting skills of Minsu (Song) but are in for more than a few surprises along the way as hench-woman Mason (Swinton) is determined to stop them reaching the sacred engine room.

Although the post apocalyptic struggle between the classes and the masses isn't a new idea, Snowpiercer feels like a breath of fresh air for both the post-apocalyptic genre and the sci-fi genre. Ho-Bong makes a huge impression with his English language debut and the film is directed with all the visual style you'd expect from one of South Korea's many auteurs. There's definitely a world cinema, slow burn pace being utilised and it can take a while for things to get moving but the film is at its most fascinating when we move into the luxury front carriages. This includes an aquarium, greenhouse, swimming pool, night club and even a sushi bar hammering home the the injustice of the rich and greedy enjoying luxury at the expense of the exploited tail end occupants.

Although there are many fine performances in the film, I have to say the one that blows them all away is Tilda Swinton. Almost unrecognisable as Wilfred's spin doctor Mason, she manages to evoke cruelty, pathos, comedy and a weird sort of pathos often in the space of one line or glance. More a bureaucratic buffoon than a super villain she serves as the perfect foil to Curtis' revolution. The action sequences are spectacularly artistic and one sequence in particular seems to pay homage to the Oldboy corridor scene, with the camera always focusing on the physical elements rather than lingering on gore.

Whilst a little slow to get going and slightly too much lingering around the climax (with Harris proving a bit of a wet blanket), Snowpiercer is a triumph and is yet more proof that the great South Korean directors can make the transition to English language (if proof were needed after Chan-Wook's Stoker). An anti-Hollywood action film with all the satirical and philosophical notes of post-apocalyptic films gone by, Go out of your way to see Snowpiercer!

**** 4 Stars

What did you think of the film? How does it compare to other South Korean works?

Oculus (2014): Review

Oculus is a 2014 supernatural horror film. Directed by Mike Flanagan (Absentia) and starring Karen Gillan (Doctor Who). The film is based upon Flanagan’s earlier short film Oculus: Chapter 3.


Oculus is the story of a haunted antique mirror handed down through the ages and eventually passing into the ownership of the Russell family. The story is told from the perspective of siblings Kayleigh (Gillan) and Tim and is split between the modern day and the early 2000s. In the modern day Tim has recently been released from prison and is reunited with his older sister who has been able to track down the sinister mirror from their childhood. She reveals that her plan is to conduct an all-night paranormal experiment to prove that the mirror is responsible for countless deaths, including their parents. At the same time, events from the pair’s childhood are told in flashback, revealing the true power of the mirror and, perhaps, a way for Kayleigh and Tim to break the curse.


The first problem with Oculus is that it’s a hugely out of date premise. The premise of a haunted mirror is something right out of a 50s b-movie or Snow White and is really hard to take seriously in the modern age when compared to modern genre classics like Ring (98) or Pulse (01). This is made worse by some seriously poor acting and a poor script to work with which does Gillan no favours in her post Who career. Her attempts to portray a psychologically fractured character in the style of a Jack Nicholson or James Brolin fall completely flat and only serve to remind you of those superior performances/films.


The other problem with the film is the split narrative. Playing somewhat like a horror Blue Valentine (2009), the film struggles to build momentum in both timelines as Flanagan can’t seem to decide when, and how to focus on each respective period. One wonders whether the film might have worked better being set primarily in the earlier timeline as the child actors are significantly more competent and the actor portraying the father actually does do quite a good Jack Nicholson impression. These earlier scenes, along with the hallucinations in the modern timeline, were the only parts of the film that managed to summon any kind of dread or suspense in building towards the film’s “shock” ending which, incidentally, felt like a pretty lousy payoff.


While I certainly appreciate any attempt at an original horror property as opposed to a sequel/reboot, taking an extremely tired premise and giving it a fresh lick of “faux-paranormal activity” paint is simply not good enough. It’s a tedious plot that genre fans have seen countless times and is dragged down further by mediocre actors and a frustrating structure. Oculus is a poor effort for Flanagan and a shaky start to Gillan’s Hollywood career, definitely one to avoid.


* 1 Star


What did you think of Oculus? Did the split narrative work for you?

X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014): Review

X-Men: Days of Future past is a 2014 comic book movie. Directed by Bryan Singer (X-Men, X2) and starring James Macavoy (X-Men: First class, Filth), Michael Fassbender (X-Men: First Class, Shame) and Hugh Jackman (The Wolverine, Prisoners). The film unites the cast of the original X-Men movies and X-Men: First Class and is both a sequel and a prequel.

The film begins in the not too distant post apocalyptic future where the Sentinels have taken over the world butchering Humans and Mutants alike. A small band of Mutants still survives led by the older versions of Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) and Magneto (Ian Mckellan). They decide that the only way to save the world is to send Wolverine (Jackman) back in time to the 70s to prevent this grim future from occurring. This involves stopping Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) from assassinating Sentinel inventor Trask (Peter Dinklage) and avoiding the chain reaction of hardline anti-mutant measures that result from this. However, this is much easier said than done (although not really) as Wolverine struggles to unite the idealogically opposed Xavier, Magneto and Mystique.

A couple of years ago I had never seen an X-Men movie and, not really being a comic book movie fan, I wasn’t really tempted. Then I was convinced to give First Class a try, mostly on the strength of Macavoy and Fassbender (undoubtedly the finest actors of their generation) and the overwhelmingly positive reviews and boy, was I bowled over. After having gone back and checked out the originals I can confirm that First Class smashed a fairly low bar set by the original trilogy with Macavoy and Fassbender playing the central characters with far more passion and gusto. This divide clearly continues into the sequel with Stewart and Mckellan (legendary actors in their own right) given very little to do in the future segments and being accompanied by an always redundant Ellen Paige and a Halle Berry performance that may as well have been CGI.

However, that is my only real criticism of the film as once we get back to the 1970s the cast are on top form. Something that was really fresh about First Class was the period setting and the way that the characters are integrated into real life history, in the last film this was the Cuban missile crisis and in this one it’s the end of the Vietnam war. This of course carries over into the fashion and the costume design again gives you a fresh canvass to work with and a way to stand out against other blockbusters. Something I also really appreciated was the young Charles Xavier sub plot where a miracle drug has allowed him to walk but has resulted in the loss of his psychic powers, serving as an allegory for drug addiction. This gave Macavoy plenty to work with as far as the character development and although, by comparison, Fassbender plays out a pretty repetetive part-time-villain trajectory (as seen in First Class) he still manages to dominate any time he's on screen.

Whilst not quite delivering the refreshing surprise that was First Class, Days of Future Past is a satisfying and thought provoking entry that continues to elevate the franchise far above any other Marvel property. I've said it before, but this decade is truly being defined by the intelligent blockbuster reboot and the revived X-Men franchise is wisely sticking to that formula. Continuing with the characters and period feel established in First Class but with enough of the original trilogy to lure in any nostalgic fans, Days of Future Past is as intriguing and exciting as it's title suggests.

***** 5 stars

What did you think of the film? Did you like the inclusion of the original cast?

Godzilla (2014): Review

Godzilla is a 2014 Kaiju action movie. The film is directed by Gareth Edwards (Monsters) and stars Aaron Taylor-Johnson (Kick-Ass), Elizabeth Olsen (Martha, Marcy, May, Marlene) and Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad). The film is a reboot of the long running Japanese franchise and the 2nd Western adaptation to date.

The film is initially set in Japan in 1999 and focuses on scientist Joe Brody (Cranston) and his family as they bear witness to a nuclear power plant disaster. Fast forward to the present day and Joe has become a reclusive conspiracy theorist whereas his son Ford (Taylor-Johnson) has grown up and started his own family with wife Elle (Olsen). Joe has become obsessed with uncovering the cause behind the disaster and, dragging Ford along, inadvertently unleash the M.U.T.Os (massive unidentified terrestrial organisms) upon the world. Fellow scientist Dr Serizawa (Ken Watanbe) reveals that the only way to stop the monsters may be to awaken another monster and Ford becomes caught up in a kaiju showdown as he tries to get home to San Francisco and reunite with his family.

It's important to note that Godzilla is not your typical action packed monster movie and whereas some unimaginative critics may try and reduce the movie to a "Nolanised" reboot of the franchise, I would say it is an "Edwardised" film. That may seem like an odd thing to say of a directors 2nd feature film but those familiar with Monsters will recognise the understated yet fantastically visual style on display as well as the tremendous pacing. Edwards had stated that he wished to return to a more classic style of monster movie where suspense and slow burn tension are favoured over excessive action sequences and over-exposure of the creatures themselves, and in this he succeeds 100%. But the great thing about Godzilla is that it also features some of the most jaw dropping special effects and spectacular action set pieces ever seen, meaning you can very much have your cake and eat it.

That being said, the film certainly isn't perfect and I feel some of claims made during the massive marketing campaign didn't necessarily ring true. Firstly, the claim of the film being more character driven so you would care more when their world fell apart around them; apart from Cranston's excellent (if somewhat limited) performance the rest of the cast turn in adequate performances at best, being limited by a very routine script, this meant I could never fully invest. Secondly, the claims that Godzilla would be returned to a morally ambiguous, anti hero character as seen in the 1954 version; I really never felt that Godzilla was anything but the hero, here to save mankind from the clearly villainous M.U.T.Os, bearing little resemblance to the terrifying Gojira character as seen in the original.

Overall, my criticisms did very little to take away from what was an enormously enjoyable experience that reduced me to a giddy child again. I feel many critics have been unfairly harsh on the film and ultimately a film with a 60 year, 28 film legacy is going to be far more scrutinised than your average summer blockbuster. Those who criticise the film for not having enough of the titular character have sadly missed the point and are possibly not that familiar with some of the Japanese films that understood sometimes less IS more. Gareth Edwards has done something remarkable and brave in this day and age in his crafting of an intelligent yet breathtaking reboot much in the vein of Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) or the Dark Knight trilogy (05-12) and with a sequel already underway, it looks like the king is back!

***** 5 stars

What did you think of Godzilla? Is it being treated unfairly?