The Invisible Man Film Review

Directed by Leigh Whannell

Starring: Elisabeth Moss, Oliver Jackson-Cohen, Harriet Dyer

Rated R for some strong bloody violence, and language.

The Invisible Man is a horror remake of the 1933 classic film with the same name, which itself was based off a novel by H.G. Wells. After leaving a abusive relationship, Cecilia (played by Elizabeth Moss) tries to live her normal life and cope with the trauma she faced in her relationship. But soon after her former partner (played by Oliver Jackson-Cohen) commits suicide, Cecilia feels like her ex boyfriend is stalking her, but in a invisible form.

The film’s main character is played by Elizabeth Moss, who delivers a strong performance. She is a character who is afraid, confused, and terrified that someone or something is stalking her. There are also a lot of physical acting that had to be done in the film. In one scene in particular, Cecilia is fighting with the invisible man. We don’t see the man itself, but we can tell she is in a vicious fight. Aldis Hodge is also in the film and plays Cecilia’s friend. Hodge also does an excellent job in the film and is actually one of the standouts from the film. The character is not only well written, but is also played excellently by Hodge. Although Hodge has been in previous films such as Hidden Figures and Straight Outta Compton, I would like to see Hodge in more starring roles. He proved in this film that is he is a likable figure who commands presence when he is on the screen and that likability can definitely be carried over to staring roles.

Although the film does have its terrifying moments, the film plays more of a suspenseful film. The opening scene has the main character leaving home in a suspended filled scene. Director Leigh Whannell made this scene filled with uneasiness due to the suspense that surrounded the scene. Without any words being said, we know what is at stake if the other character wakes up. I like how Whannell did not have to dumb down the scene and explain what was happening. The scene itself explains it all.

But as much I enjoyed the film, the film did slow down a bit in the second act of the film. I certainly understand having Cecilia in the attic looking for clues is supposed to be suspenseful but the scene did get dragged on a bit. While do appreciate the film not going the cliche jump scare route and actually building the tension, I believe cutting parts of the scene would have been best. It is until the third act where things pick up. While a tad bit predictable, the entire third act is not only action pack, but fast paced as well. The third act is filled with many twists and turns that the final act makes up for the slow second act.

The Invisible Man is a different type of horror film that doesn’t stoop low to the typical horror film cliches. The film is certainly filled with relatable leads who give strong performances. Leigh Whannell not only directs this well directed film, but also writes a story that is grounded in reality. The story of having someone leave an abusive relationship certainly plays a big role in the film, but also brilliantly has a long lasting effect in it. The Invisible Man is a smart and terrifying film that has a lot to offer and will certainly keep the audience thinking about the film long after it is over.

3/4

Brahms: The Boy II Film Review

Directed by William Brent Bell

Starring: Katie Holmes, Owain Yeoman, Christopher Convery

Rated PG-13 for terror, violence, disturbing images and thematic elements

Brahms: The Boy II is a horror sequel to 2016’s The Boy. The film centers around a family who move to the countryside after a trauma inducing robbery greatly affects a mother and son. After moving to the countryside, Jude (played by Christopher Convery) finds a doll and begins to connect to it. But soon after, things turn awry in the house as the doll begins to take over Jude.

What I enjoyed from The Boy is that the film tries to not be a cliche horror film. Most horror films start off with a new family moving to the countryside with no context. But The Boy actually shows us why the family moves to a new house. It does bring up an interesting concept of having a son and mother (played by Katie Holmes) traumatized after a robbery. And while it is an interesting concept, the film sometimes tries to be a psychological horror. I wish the film gone that route, unfortunately, it only tries to not be cliche. Instead, the film fails and becomes a typical horror film.

The film relies heavily on jump scares to get the audience afraid. The film is filled with cheap tricks such as a nightmare waking up a character and a musical cue having to do the scaring. It has the same backstory of a dead family that we have all seen before. It has the creepy doll that seems innocent at first, but is actually menacing. It fills all the checklist that a horror film should have. And when the film is not trying to scare the audience, it is filled with dull dialogue in scenes that go nowhere. I can’t begin to count how many scenes feature a character sleeping. The repetitive of many scenes bring down the film and make it more dull. In addition, while the film has a run time of 90 minutes, it certainly feels much longer.

The Boy is a horror film that doesn’t offer much that heavily relies on cliches. The repetitiveness of many scenes make the film seen longer than it should be. Quite honestly, this a forgettable film that doesn’t evoke much emotion or a reaction to the film. There is not much to say for a film that doesn’t try to stand out and instead lazily fills a horror film checklist.

1.5/4

Fantasy Island (2020) Film Review

Directed by Jeff Wadlow

Starring: Michael Peña, Lucy Hale, Austin Stowell

Rated PG-13 for violence, terror, drug content, suggestive material and brief strong language

Fantasy Island is a horror film based off the 1977 film series of the same name. The film stars Michael Pena, as Mr. Roarke an owner of a private island who invites 5 strangers to his island. The strangers come to the island on the opportunity with living out their fantasies. But as the group live out their fantasies, they soon realize their dreams soon become a nightmare.

The concept of Fantasy Island is an interesting one as living out your dreams is something we all want to do. As the film has an interesting concept, the film poorly executed and is very boring to watch. The film shows the fantasies of all the strangers, and they all seem uninteresting. One character wants to live out the dream of being in the military, another has the dream of reliving a regret she recently has, another one wants to humiliate her childhood bully, and two brothers just want to party. At some point of viewing each character’s dream, the film just slows down and doesn’t feel like a horror film. To keep the film coherent, the screenplay should have written just one character coming into the island and living out their dream with things turning sideways soon afterwards. Seeing all the characters and their fantasies slows the film down and makes the film boring.

As mentioned before, Michael Pena stars as the film’s main antagonist. As much as I respect Pena’s work, his portrayal of Mr. Roarke feels tiresome. Pena’s role requires him to be a menacing person who is also very mysterious. But with all due respect to Pena, he could not become the mysterious and menacing person the film requires him to be. Pena certainly could have fun with the role, but in the end it feels like Pena is in the film for a paycheck. No emotions are given by Pena, he just plays the character straightforward. And saying this about Pena is a shame as he is capable of giving a great performance when giving the right script.

But the biggest problem of the film is the screenplay that is lazily written. The first two acts are the characters living out their fantasies, but its all boring, as mentioned before. But in the third act is where things finally pick up. The group has to work together to get off the island. But there is a twist that is delivered that is sloppy written. The film tries to explain the twist by having a character say, “I was just acting”, which makes no sense at all. Having a twist like this only makes the film end on a sour note, considering the final act actually began to show some promise for the film. To add to the screenplay, its unfunny, dull, and too long. The entire screenplay should have been scrapped in favor for a gripping story.

Overall, Fantasy Island is a bland film that actually has an creative concept that is quickly wasted. When the film actually started to show some potential, a poorly executed twist ruins the film. The unfunny moments, dull characters, and non-scary moments make Fantasy Island a forgetful film.

1.5/4

It Chapter 2 Film Review

Directed by Andy Muschietti

Starring: Jessica Chastain, James McAvoy, Bill Hader

Rated R for disturbing violent content and bloody images throughout, pervasive language, and some crude sexual material

Two years after the original “It” film was released, we finally get the second half of Stephen King’s novel. “It” is terrifying, suspenseful, and funny in all the right ways, but with flaws within the film. “It Chapter 2” is the sequel of “It”, both based of the novel, the novel being divided into two parts. In “It Chapter 2”, the “Losers Club”, reunite 27 years later after the events of the first film, to defeat Pennywise, a human eating clown, once again.

The selling point of “It Chapter 2” is the Losers Club all grown up and shown as adults, in particular Bill Hader and Isaiah Mustafa. Both actors portray two totally different characters who fear Pennywise and are set to defeat him. Hader plays Richie, a stand up comic who uses comedy throughout the film to ease the tension and fear of Pennywise. Hader is funny when he needs to and very emotional as well. The final scenes of Hader being emotional is sold so well that it takes you out of the film and makes you believe the emotions coming out of Hader. Mustafa, on the other hand, plays Mike, a character who is set and obsessed with Pennywise. Mustafa plays Mike as a bit crazy who can’t seem to let go of the past, while all his former friends have seem to let go of the past and moved on with their lives. Both Hader and Mustafa are the highlights in the cast, in my opinion. Not to say that the other adults are good but these two stand out from the cast.

“It Chapter 2” shows how all horror films should be done. The film does not rely on cheap jump scare, but instead it builds upon suspense. For instance, the Chinese restaurant was not only a heartwarming scene but terrifying and suspenseful. The reason why this scene is sold so well is because all the characters get ominous fortunate cookies, therefore foreshadowing something dark yet to come. There are many scenes such as these, where the tension is built only for the horror elements to be revealed.

Many critics have pointed out the excessive run time of the film, as the film is over two and a half hours. There is nothing wrong when a film has an excessive run time, but those films have each scene feel important and relevant. The problem that “It 2” has is that there are many scenes that either run too long or feel irrelevant. In the film, it is revealed that Bowers, the bully from the first film, was place in a mental institution only for for him to break out with a dead corpse. Bowers is set to kill the Losers Club but this side plot is just wasted. For starters, this is shown in the beginning of the film and feels forgotten after it is shown. Once this plot point is shown again, it feels tacked on, as if the director almost forgot about this side plot. With this film being very long, it would have helped to cut this plot point. It may have been included in the original Stephen King but when a book is translated to a film, many plot points have to be cut out.

Towards the second act of the film, the Losers Club separate and find their own version of It. This part of the film feels dragged out and certainly feels long. We see the majority of the characters enter an old building only for something to terrorize the characters. It is understood that “It” was formerly a book and these scenes may have been in the book. But screenwriters do have to understand that not everything that is included in the book has to be on the big screen. If these scenes needed to be shown, then it would have been best that only one character being terrorize and remembering the past, not multiple characters.

I certainly had much enjoyment with “It Chapter 2”, it certainly has many scares that actually got me jumping out of my seat. Pennywise is a horrifying clown that proves why people should be afraid of clowns. “It Chapter 2” is not only frightening, but it is heartwarming and hilarious due to in part of the characters and the actors portraying them. If only the film had more scenes left on the cutting room floor, “It Chapter 2” would have been the perfect sequel to the original “It”.

3/4

Ready or Not Film Review

Directed by Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett

Starring: Samara Weaving, Adam Brody, Mark O’Brien

Rated R for violence, bloody images, language throughout, and some drug use

“Ready or Not” stars Samara Weaving as a new bride, Grace, who is trying to be accepted to her husband’s new family. Grace, on her wedding night, must play hide and seek but the game become deadly as her husband’s family tries to kill her, as a ritual cult. In all it’s gory fashion, we see the deadly game of hide and seek.

“Ready or Not” is an horror/suspense comedic film that is surprisingly a good time. From the beginning, we get to meet Grace as a kind hearted person who is not marrying her husband for money but for love. The film does a well job explaining how Grace does not come from a wealthy family and shows her as an outcast compared to the wealthy family she is marrying into. This is in part of the job done by Samara Weaving, who has done a fair job portraying a new bride who is being hunted down. The pain and suffering Grace goes through is sold extremely well by Samara Weaving. The rest of the cast are amusing as well, in part because their roles are more of a comedic roles. Kristan Bruun is the standout of the family as Fitch, who always has a quick line or something comedic to say. Unfortunately his role is very limited, I would have loved for his character to get more of a role in the film.

As mentioned before, the film takes a comedic role as supposed to a horror film. “Ready or Not” quite honestly would have worked perfectly as a horror film. It has all the horror film elements, murder, haunted mansion, and cult rituals. But the had directors chose to take a comedic role due to the ending, which is ridiculously bad. In fact, the entire third act is where things fall apart. For instance, we get one character who instantly changes to the villain’s side. I found that switch so out of place, considering how this person’s character throughout the film was set on the goal of not becoming the villain. I could understand the sudden switch, but in the end, it was a waste of character development. After we see the switch, multiple characters die in a gory fashion. Was it fun to watch? Yes, but it was very unbelievable, it threw the entire film off. The entire film was grounded in reality but the last five minutes threw that out the window.

I would have preferred to seen “Ready or Not” as a pure horror film as a new bride trying to escape her husband’s family from death. I am in no way trying to dismiss the film or it’s comedy, because the film is actually worth seeing and the comedy is hilarious when done right. It just that I would have chosen a different route if I were one of the directors of the film. But “Ready or Not” is an entertaining horror comedy that does have its fair share of issues, but the entertaining value overshadows the flaws of the film.

3/4

Midsommar Film Review

Directed by Ari Aster

Starring: Florence Pugh, Jack Reynor, William Jackson Harper

Rated R for disturbing ritualistic violence and grisly images, strong sexual content, graphic nudity, drug use and language

There is a phrase many filmmakers and film critics love to say, show don’t tell. It is so commonly said when a filmmaker needs to present something on screen instead of having characters say it. Seasoned filmmakers know when to use this aspect and a majority of them use them well. Writer and director Ari Aster not only uses the concept of show don’t tell, but unfortunately uses it way too much.

“Midsommar” is a horror film in which a group of friends are invited to a Swedish village, which partake in cult like events. The main protagonist is Dani (played by Florence Pugh), who is recently recovering deaths in the family and is invited by her boyfriend, Christian (played by Jack Reynor). “Midsommar” is a film that is filled with shock and horror, along with gory images that are very unsettling.

This is the main criticism that was mentioned earlier, show don’t tell. There are too many aspects of director Aster showing too much on the screen such as graphic sex or gruesome deaths. For example, when we see two characters in the nude, we know sexual activities are engaging. But Aster has this scene play out for a few minutes which makes the audience feel extremely uncomfortable, that is perhaps the intentions of the director. But there is a line that is crossed when it comes to sexual and violent images and “Midsommar” certainly crosses the line.

But while there is criticism to be had with the imagery, I can commend the technical aspects of the film. Florence Pugh (who caught my eye in “Fighting With My Family”) does a tremendous job carrying the film. There are many moments where her character has to convey emotions of sadness, anger, confusion and all without saying any word. She does a great job with her acting, it is the highlight in the film. I certainly agree that Pugh was great to watch on screen and I do hope to see more of her in future films. The film is also filled with great cinematography and editing. The cinematography was certainly eye catching and was very pleasing to see on the screen. There are multiple scenes where the director chooses not to cut but instead keeps the film rolling.

The first 15 minutes of the film features a family dying in a disturbing fashion. Not only is it unsettling but it adds nothing to the rest of the film. There are multiple instances of this being brought up in the rest of the film but quite frankly, if this scene was not included in the film, then it would not change the film. The best way to describe the film is that it’s just slow. It is after the one hour mark where we actually get introduced the horror elements. When it is introduced, the film does drag on for the worse. To make matters worse, the film has a run time that is over two hours. Not that films with a considerable long run times are bad, but they need to be long for a specific reason. There were multiple scenes that could have been left on the cutting room floor to make the film shorter.

Although the film’s highlights are the acting, cinematography, and editing, the film unfortunately a slow burn with uneasy imagery. “Midsommar” is not meant for mainstream audiences, it is meant for the audiences who love indie films. If you are expecting a smart horror film that makes you think, this will certainly be your cup of tea but those who are expecting something else, such as myself, I would pass on this one.

2/4

Brightburn Film Review

Directed by David Yarovesky

Starring Elizabeth Banks, David Denman, Jackson A Dunn

Rated R for horror violence/bloody images, and language

The most famous superhero, Superman, has a very famous origin story. Born on the planet Kyprton, Kal-El crashed into Kansas and grew up on a farm. While becoming a young man, Clark discovers his powers and decides to use them for good. 2019’s Brightburn explores this idea but with a twist, what if Superman came to Earth and decided to use his powers for destruction.

Brightburn is a horror film in which a young teenager, Brandon Breyer (played by Jackson A Dunn) discovers he harvests dangerous powers and soon starts to kill citizens of his small hometown. The film stars Elizabeth Banks and David Denman as Brandon’s parents who soon realize that their son may be a psychotic killer with super powers. As a horror movie, it plays it safe with the predictable jump scares. Yes, there are genuine jump scares but they are cheap jump scares . A clear example is a jump scare at the beginning of the film with one character trying to find another character in a barn. It’s been done before in previous horror films, it is nothing new.

The biggest mistake Brightburn makes is not exploring its interesting plot. A teenager with super powers killing people is a very intriguing idea but its just very basic. There was a perfect opportunity to have character development. The Beyer family were a regular family until a series of events breaks them apart. The screenplay could have showed the family slowly breaking apart, becoming more and more dysfunctional due to Brandon’s actions and mysterious emotions. It seems very sudden when the family does break down. Brightburn is a horror film, but having family drama would have been a welcomed change to the horror film genre. Instead it seems like the run of the mill horror film.

All of the actors do a good job with the material given, but the characters they play have some very questionable actions . For example, how did the sheriff of Brightburn jump to the conclusion of Brandon being the one behind the murders? What was Brandon’s uncle plan when he decided to drive to… well it’s never explained. It is questions like these that make the screenplay lazy and not well fleshed out.

Brightburn does have a very interesting idea but it is not executed very well. It does miss many opportunities that would have made Brightburn stand out from the other regular horror films. The film is an average horror film with some decent scares and gruesome images but in the end Brightburn feels like a let down with its compelling story.

2.5/4

Pet Sematary Film Review

Directed by Kevin Kölsch and Dennis Widmyer

Starring: Jason Clarke, Amy Seimetz, John Lithgow

Rated R for horror violence, bloody images, and some language

Pet Sematary is a remake of the 1989 film of the same name, which in turn is an adaptation of the novel written by Stephen King. In this horror film, we are introduced to the Creed family who are new to a small town in Maine (of course) and freaky and odd phenomenons start to occur when the family discovers a pet “sematary” near their home. One day the family cat, dies and with the help of their neighbor Jud, (John Lithgow) the cat is brought back to life which opens up Pandora’s box.

Pet Sematary seems to follow many of the tropes that we have to come known in horror films. The family moving to a new home that seems a nice place to get away from the city. Then on the first night things start to get freaky and odd without any explanations. The mother who sees this as trouble is wanting to go home but the father is insiting the family stays. In addition to those, we get the false jump scares, for example someone or something jumps out of no where as a wink to the audience to say “hey, we are still a horror film”. It seems very repetitive and when watching this film you can tell what would come next. This is something I have an issue with most horror films, not just Pet Sematary. Now I do understand that this film is an adaptation of the 1983 novel and maybe the novel has all of these tropes that I just described. But when making the leap from the pages to screen, something has to change and I feel that this could have been changed.

The biggest crime that Pet Sematary commits is that is just too boring. It takes a good thirty minutes before the plot starts to move along. There were many instances where I was checking my watch just because of the pure boredom that was presented on the screen. I am not asking for jump scares or action for every scene, but something interesting such as character development could be nice. Although I can give props that Louis (Jason Clarke) was not a believer of an afterlife or second chances but in the end he changes his mind. That is an interesting idea that does work in the type of situation he is in.

The film also fails to explain many of the ideas presented. Louis is a doctor who loses a patient and is haunted by that patient. It is never explained why that was happening. Was it a hallucination or was it actually a “zombie”? But Louis’ child sees the deceased patient, so that raises more questions than answers. It also doesn’t add much to the plot. Directors Kolsch and Widmyer could have cut this story arc and it would not have made the film better or worse.

But a horror film’s most important job is to scare the audience. Does it do that? Well, yes but the scares are filled in a boring film with tropes that we have seen before. If you are a Stephen King fan, I suppose you can watch it just to see how this differs from the book and the 1989 film, but I highly recommend to give it a pass. This is something that should not have been brought back to life.

2/4

Us Review

Directed by Jordan Peele

Starring: Lupita Nyong’o, Winston Duke, Elisabeth Moss

Rated R for violence/terror, and language

Us is the sophomore effort from Academy Award winner writer and director Jordan Peele. Peele’s previous film , Get Out, was critically acclaimed due to his smart and funny screenplay that has a social message to racism of today. When Us was announced as Peele’s next project, I immediately asked how could Peele make another film as good as Get Out. Us is a film that does not disappoint in the scares.

Us is a suspended filled horror film that stars Lupita Nyong’o who is fighting off, along with her family, a group of doppelgangers who are terrorizing her. Peele brings in his sense of humor in a dark and twisted plot and it works well. Many times in horror films, we see characters who try to be funny or witty but it comes out dry or unfunny. But considering Peele’s background in comedy, his comedy in the screenplay brings light in a terrifying scene. That is what is makes Us unique and different from other horror films.

While watching Us, I was comparing this to the works of Alfred Hitchcock. Although it can be a bit unfair to compare Peele to the legendary director, there is a reason why the comparison can be made. Both Peele and Hitchcock are good at making suspense. If one Hitchcock film could be compared to Us, it would have to be The Birds. Both The Birds and Us both take place in California where an outside force start to attack our main characters and the town the setting takes place. Both films feel like something that would be apart of the Twilight Zone. But as mentioned before, it is unfair to compare Peele to Hitchcock as Peele is probably influenced by Hitchcock but wants to follow is his own path in film making.

There is never a dull moment in Us. It is a smart and intriguing film that will have the viewer on their edge of their seat. The main actors, Lupita Nyong’o and Winston Duke, are great in Us and should be praised . But if one complaint had to be made, it is the twist ending. Without giving out any spoilers, I will say that the twist is smart and clever but it does not make sense and does not work, considering what we have been told throughout the story. Us is a funny and smart film that gives life to the horror genre, I highly recommend this one.

3.5/4