Cursed (2005)

I went on a bit of a run of Werewolf movies at the start of the year after my disappointment with “The Wolf Man” (2025). After watching six of them I felt I’d cleaned the bad taste out of my mouth, but I had several left over. Naturally, I set some aside for my October reviews. Tonight’s movie is a Wes Craven film that I probably watched when it first came out, but 20 years later had totally forgotten about. I only know I watched it as I already had a rating for it on IMDb. The good news is while I forgot about it, I apparently liked it more this time around. We’ll get to that a bit later.

Wes Craven is mostly known for his two huge successes, Scream and Nightmare on Elm Street. Two franchises that both spawned 7-8 Sequels and a TV show. Between those movies Wes was very hit and miss. While most like “Serpent and the Rainbow” and the first “Hills Have Eyes” films, response to the likes of “Shocker”, “Vampire in Brooklyn” and “Deadly Friend” are mixed to poor. This film falls into the same category. So let’s have a look at it. While Craven directs, with the screenplay written by long time collaborator Kevin Williamson. Cinematography is by Robert McLachlan and music by Marco Beltrami.

Two Wolves

Ellie and Jimmy Myers (Played by Christina Ricci and Jesse Eisenberg respectively) are two orphaned siblings that share a house together and have a somewhat strained relationship. Jimmy is in college while Ellie is an associate producer for a late night TV show. One night while Ellie is driving Jimmy home they hit another car and after recovering and checking on the other car they are both attacked by a monstrous wolf.

Jimmy quickly suspects it is a Werewolf. Ellie though didn’t get a good look and thinks that is Jimmy’s imagination. Despite this, the next day the two begin to experience changes. Their instinct, aggression and strength all seem to have increased. But the changes aren’t stopping there. Jimmy realizes that the Werewolf that attacked them may not want the competition. But who was it? They need to find it, before it finds them! Oh and their dog has the curse too. I have no idea what you call that.

Passing Grade

There is nothing groundbreaking here. The plot is pretty straight forward despite a few swerves on the identity of the Werewolf that attacked them. Having a number of werewolves in the story including the two protagonists dealing with their curse does make it stand out a little, but they don’t really do that much with any of it. The two protagonists get a bit of time each, just enough to show their approaches (Denial Vs Exploration) and how it is impacting them, but little else. The other Werewolves have their identity kept secret and so we never get to explore how they live with the curse. It’s fine, but there were interesting things her that could have been developed.

The protagonists are both likable, which is something often missing in modern horror. Again though they don’t really give us anything new or interesting with them. Given this isn’t a particularly long film it was perhaps a mistake to have two leads, but it’s not a disaster. Craven and Williamson cover everything that needs to be covered and little else. That counts for the whole story, not just the characters. No time is wasted, scenes speed by, often moving on just as they are getting interesting and everything falls into place largely as you would expect it to. The pace means the movie doesn’t drag and it’s well directed and acted the whole way through. The end result is a movie that is reasonably enjoyable, yet also disappointing.

Production Hell

It is worth mentioning that this is a movie that went through it’s own production hell. There are actually at least three very different versions of this movie knocking around in the archives. The first was complete, save for the ending and music. It had very little in common with the released version outside of some of the cast. The movie was then almost entirely re-written and re-shot (Keeping only about 12 minutes) at the behest of Bob and Harvey Weinstein. Part of this seems to have been a desire for a PG-13 rating. The second version, which was complete enough to show audiences in test screenings (And receive a positive reaction), was also largely re-worked after Dimension Films voiced their own complaints.

The first version of the film was a very different story about a serial killer who learns his drive to kill comes from being born with the Werewolf curse. The second version plays up the tragedy side of these movies, something severely lacking in the final version. When seen by people, both versions are always said to be superior to what was released. Still, the final version isn’t all bad. Wes Craven is no stranger to studio interference. He had a similar experience with “Deadly Friend“, with the end result being nothing like he originally intended. At least this time around, the final movie has tonal consistency (Instead of feeling like two different movies glued together).

Conclusion

Overall, this isn’t a bad movie and it does have a Wes Craven feel to it. The acting, characters, plot and effects are all fine. It all works, but you can’t help but feel there was a lot more potential here and it was all wasted. Knowing about the other versions of the story, it seems we almost did get a better movie. Unfortunately, Werewolf movies are hard to get right and it’s no surprise the studio was completely clueless about how to do it. Wes Craven, for his part seems like he did know, but was never able to convince New Line of that. So we got what we got. This is a strong 5.5/10. My original IMDb score was a 4, which I’ve raised to a 6 (Rounding up). I guess it was better second time around.

Rating: 5.5 out of 10.

Bay of Blood (1971)

Time for this years first trip into the world of Italian horror. This is a movie from Gialo legend Mario Bava. If you’ve been following my reviews, you may recall me waxing lyrical about “Blood and Black Lace” (1964). After that I always planned to watch more of his work. I’ve actually only seen three of Bava’s movies, but I always intended to increase that number. This particular movie was recommended to me on X, specifically as a movie that heavily influenced the slasher genre. Too much to pass up here and so I squeezed it in to my October viewing list. The screenplay is from Bava, Giuseppe Zaccariello and Filippo Ottoni. Bava does cinematography here and Stelvio Cipriani provides the music.

one night, at a bayside mansion, Countess “Federica Donati” is murdered. A short while later, the woman’s husband and apparent killer is stabbed to death. A suicide note is left behind for the countess, but the husbands body is missing by the time the police investigate. His daughter “Renata” and her husband “Albert” arrive at the bay to investigate her fathers disappearance. She has an ulterior motive though as the bay was owned by the Countess and she plans to inherit. They aren’t the only people after the bay though as real estate broker Frank Ventura and his lover, Laura are also scheming to buy the land cheap. Then there is the countess’ son (Renata’s step brother), who has been hidden from the world, living in a shack by the bay. As more murders start to happen the question becomes who is hunting who?

Thirteen Corpses

I can definitely see how this was an influence on the slasher genre. Most specifically thought, Friday the 13th (Part one). There is a whole section that is sort of a footnote to the main story, but is straight out of 80’s slasher movies. It’s almost the template for the first four Friday the 13th films, yet it’s only a 20 minute segment of the movie. It’s like other directors watched this and decide it would be even better if this was the entire movie. There’s even a bit of nudity and pre-marital sex in the mix. The rest of the movie has plenty of elements that I can see influenced future slashers, but this particular section stands out.

Of course being Giallo there is no shortage of gore. What makes this different is the faster pace and sheer number of kills. There are thirteen kills, a deliberate number (The kills were written before the story). Friday the 13th didn’t reach that body count until part IV (Exceeding it if you include Jason’s own death). Some of the kills are pretty graphic too, including a beheading that pushed the gore a little bit into the unbelievable territory. Several of these could be seen as direct influences on similar deaths within the Friday the 13th franchise. Speaking of that number (Thirteen), it’s especially relevant here as the events all kick off on the 13th. The day isn’t specified, but it could well be a Friday.

The Art of the Slasher

Bava is his own cinematographer here, and so he gets the credit for the creative filming. I especially took note of his use taking the camera out-of-focus. Bava does this throughout, sometimes through zooming, but not always. Many times this is used for a transitions. The technique helps to give the film as smooth flow instead of making hard cuts. This makes the film seem both artistic, but also a little like found footage. Another slasher element on display here is the occasional use of the first person. It is used sparingly, but effectively. Bava was forced to finish the film with a minimal budget and so it’s no surprise a lot of what he came up with ended up as standard techniques for low budget slashers.

There’s plenty of jump scares too, usually the kills come out of nowhere. Being the first of it’s kind it’s not a surprise that there aren’t any false jumps (Something that would become a mainstay of future slashers). The main difference between Bay and most slashers is (Spoiler) there are multiple killers. I won’t elaborate too much on that since that would be major spoilers, but this isn’t a folk law killer wiping everyone out. Perhaps the most interesting thing here is that visually this is a step away from what you expect from giallo. Indeed, I’m not sure it can even be classified as such. This truly is a slasher film or at least half way between the two.

Conclusion

There are however, flaws. Most of which involve the plot. The ending is frankly a bit silly and there is at least one murder that doesn’t seem to make much sense logistically. Honestly, I think this has a plot that falls apart the more you think about it. But then, this is a slasher, what did I expect? In regards to the characters, they all seemed to have personalities. Even those doomed to a short life expectancy. I wouldn’t really call it depth, but Bava at least attempts to make them seem human, which is more than I can say for some modern slashers. The acting too is decent and despite being an Italian horror, I didn’t notice any awkward dubbing.

It’s not necessarily by design that this is a proto-slasher, instead, it’s likely a result of production issues. As a slasher, the overly convoluted plots means it lacks focus. But as a giallo it lacks flair. Overall though, while not as visually stunning as Blood and Black lace, this is a groundbreaking movie. It still stands the test of time as a solid and unique slasher film, even by modern standards. It is worthy of a strong 6.5/10. This is a must see for slasher and giallo fans alike. If you aren’t a fan of either sub-genre, then it’s a mild recommendation instead.

Rating: 6.5 out of 10.

Puppet Master (1989)

Tonight’s horror review is “Puppet Master” from 1989. Shockingly I’ve never gotten on board with this particular horror franchise. I’ve seen enough clips to be aware of the individual puppets and the general concept, but never watched a movie. That gives me a lot to catch up on because there are fifteen of them (Including one remake). The third movie “Toulon’s Revenge” is generally considered the best one, but I’m not one to skip ahead. This is of course from Charles Band’s “Full Moon Pictures” production company. The company (In one form or another) that gave us Ghoulies, Head of the Family, Tourist Trap and Bad CGI Gator, to name but a few.

Puppet Master is written and directed by “Tourist Trap” (1979) director David Schmoeller. As is often the case with these films, Charlies brother Richard provides the score. Cinematography is provided by Sergio Salvati who also performed that job for the Lucio Fulci movie “The Beyond” (1981). Paul Le Mat plays the protagonist “Alex”, but it’s an ensemble story really. You won’t know who any of these people are so I’m skipping the list. The story involves a group of psychics that are drawn together by a psychic message from an old acquaintance. An unpleasant man that has been searching for the ancient secret to giving life to the inanimate. When they arrive they find the man has died, but it seems he has plans that go beyond death.

Puppets in the Hands of Fate

This has a more complex set up than I was expecting from this movie. The group of psychics being drawn together by a message from a dead man is a pretty interesting premise in itself. It didn’t really need murderous puppets, nor did the puppets need the psychics. But, this is actually pretty normal Charles Band films of the time. Likely it was done to reduce the amount of time they had to animate the puppets. Ghoulies was very similar, with a story about sorcery that only tangentially related to the monsters. The difference here is story doesn’t get in the way of the carnage. The puppets are directly tied to the purpose of main plot rather then just being there like in Ghoulies.

The effects and animation of the puppets is pretty reasonable. Obviously these days you could do better, but nothing here took me out of it. I’m not convinced the design of Leech Woman and Pinhead (Not the one from Hellraiser) is particularly effective. Leech Woman needs people to basically stay still while she slowly vomits leeches onto them. Pinhead meanwhile just punches and strangles people, but is easily thrown off. Practicality aside, they are all pretty original and creepy looking. The acting is pretty reasonable for a low budget horror too.

Conclusion

While not a horror masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination, this was a better film than I was expecting. It’s an entirely reasonable B-Movie. That said, there’s nothing to write home about here either. No stand out scenes or characters. The puppets don’t really get enough screen time individually to call them iconic just yet, though certainly creative. Despite having a more complex than expected set up, the story itself is simple once it gets rolling. So ultimately this is an okay horror, if a little dated. But it’s quick, punchy and original and is the first of a long run of films so I’d say it’s worthwhile if you are a horror fan. Just about a 6/10.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

Brides of Dracula (1960)

I was introduced to Hammer’s Dracula around about age ten. So for me Christopher Lee will always be my Dracula. So on the surface it may seem odd that I’ve never seen this sequel to 1958’s “Dracula” (“Horror of Dracula” to my US readers). But when you realize this is a sequel that features neither Christopher Lee nor Dracula you can probably see why I would skip it. A harsh decision to be sure, because it is still directed by the great Terence Fisher and still stars the legendary Peter cushing. Almost any Hammer film worth watching involves one or both of those people. So time to give it a chance. Jimmy Sangster, Peter Bryan and Edward Percy provide the screenplay and Jack Asher the cinematography. Composer Malcolm Williamson provides a score in the classic Hammer style of James Bernard.

Dracula is gone, but his disciples still plague Transylvania. One such vampire, “Baron Meinster” has so far been contained by his mother, the Baroness. He is kept chained in his private quarters at their castle. While his mother wishes to contain this evil, she still feeds it. The Baroness brings young women to the castle, kills them and feed his son their blood. One potential victim, “Marianne”, a school teacher passing through the area instead frees the Baron. This unleashes the evil and makes her the focus of the Baron’s dark desires. Fortunately for her, while feeling the castle she is picked up by a travelling “Doctor Van Helsing” (Cushing), in the area to hunt for just such monsters.

Brides of Meinster

Hammer horrors are formulaic, there’s no denying that. However they usually well made, have a great soundtrack and get elevated by a small number of great actors putting in powerful performances. Christopher Lee, André Morell, Michael Gough and Charles Gray are on that list of actors. But none were more important to Hammer films than Peter Cushing, who appeared in no less than twenty two of their movies. Peter of course stars here. However, there is no Christopher Lee in this “Dracula” movie. Christopher was concerned about being type cast and turned down the role. Obvious he got over it later (Appearing in another six sequels after this).

Instead of recasting Dracula, they stuck with the ending of the previous movie from 1958 and moved on to a new vampire threat. Fine in theory, though it makes the title even more misleading. “Brides of Dracula” in the novel refers to the vampire women that reside with the Count. So the two vampire women in the story could be called “Brides” but not really of “Dracula”. They actually contribute very little to the story too. But the bigger problem is the substitute “Baron Meinster” is a poor imitation. Played by a mediocre David Peel, who retired from acting not long after. His acting is solid though compared to the “Brides”.

Conclusion

While the brides role is minimal so easy to forgive, leading lady Yvonne Monlaur’s acting is inconsistent throughout. At times she’s very good, at times notably poor. Perhaps I am being a bit harsh though because this is all in comparison to Peter Cushing’s naturally flawless performance as Van Helsing. It may also be unfair to compare Meinster to Christopher Lee’s Dracula. I acknowledge that, but it’s impossible not to make that comparison in a Hammer film with “Dracula” in the title. It’s also worth noting Lee wasn’t always great as Dracula, though only because he didn’t want to be there for those later films. At his peak, there was no better Dracula.

More importantly and far less debatable is that there is no better Van Helsing than Peter Cushing. His presence raises this film up by at least one star. The music helps too. This is classic Hammer and while it doesn’t do anything new it works perfectly well. Sadly the story starts far more interestingly than it ends and it’s notable the good part of the story is the bit before Van Helsing turns up. This means the film never really peaks. Terrence Fisher competently directs throughout, but this isn’t his best work. For that, we’d have to wait another eight years for “The Devil Rides Out”. Sadly I can only give this a 5.5/10. Worthwhile for Hammer fans, but otherwise forgettable.

Rating: 5.5 out of 10.

Wyrmwood: Apocalypse (2021)

I watched and reviewed the first Wyrmwood movie for a previous October Challenge. If you read that review, you will know that I liked the film and gave it a recommendation. It was surprisingly innovative and very impressive for the shoestring budget. I found out about the sequel right away, but I held off watching it until this year’s October challenge. So here we are. Like the first film this is written/directed and produced by Kiah Roache-Turner and stars Jay Gallagher, Bianca Bradey and Luke McKenzie. Tristan Roache-Turner assists with the writing. Cinematography is by Tim Nagle and music is by Michael Lira.

The movie picks up an indeterminate amount of time after the first film. Brooke (Bradey) and Barry (Gallagher) are travelling with another sibling pair of Grace (Tasia Zalar) and Maxi (Shantae Barnes Cowan). Grace is a hybrid, like Brooke but without the power to control other zombies. After some kind of incident between them the groups split and Grace is captured by Wasteland loner Rhys (McKenzie) and delivered to a research center where they are supposedly researching a cure. Rhys is beginning to doubt the researchers methods and goals and turns on them, teaming up with Maxi, Brooke and Barry.

Mad Max Vs Zombies

This is a grindhouse style zombie movie. There are a lot of grindhouse zombie films because it’s very easy and cheap to do and the stories largely write themselves. More upmarket zombie films may feature social commentary (All Romero’s movies), great special effects (Like in Return of the Living Dead) or a focus on human survivors (See, every Walking Dead show and spin off). Grindhouse zombie films are much more straightforward. The focus is on having some fun and not thinking too hard about it. As these goes, probably the best you are likely to get is “Planet Terror” (2007), from the double movie feature called “Grindhouse”. But the original Wyrmwood (2014) came pretty close. Introducing a Mad Max aesthetic to the genre and the idea of Zombie fumes fueling those Mad Max vehicles.

Apocalypse, follows on directly from that story and presents more of the same. This is both it’s strength and it’s biggest flaw. Although it does a relatively good job it doesn’t have the originality presented by the first film and it doesn’t move the story forward in any meaningful way. Ultimately there was no reason to do a sequel, at least not a direct sequel. The good aspects, the Mad Max stuff, the zombie fuel and the returning characters are all things we’ve seen before. In many ways this is a very safe sequel. The plot itself is mostly a duplication of the previous movie too. None of it is actually bad though, it’s just unimaginative.

Conclusion

Much like the previous movie, the acting is solid and a lot better than you usually expect for a low budget zombie film. It’s almost the same cast as the previous movie, but the quality in general seems improved. To be clear, no one is winning Oscars here, but it’s above average for grindhouse horror. The soundtrack is pretty solid and the effects work well. The cyborg zombie introduced late on does look pretty cool. The switch of roles for Luke McKenzie is another thing that works well and Rhys’ base camp and lifestyle are the closest this movie comes to an original idea. But it doesn’t last long and the focus mostly returns to re-doing the first film.

Overall, this is an okay zombie sequel. You need to watch the first Wyrmwood movie to understand it as it doesn’t really explain anything. If you have watched that and you did enjoy it, then you probably will enjoy this one. It is less innovative and doesn’t really add much to that story, but is perhaps a bit tighter and more polished production. I do like Kiah Roache-Turner as a writer/director. I’ve seen four of his movies, all were interesting and none were bad. The first “Wyrmwood” and “Nekrotronic” (2018) were actually quite good. This one is weaker, but above average overall and a solid 5.5/10. Recommended, but only if you enjoyed the first film.

Rating: 5.5 out of 10.

Weapons (2025)

Horror is booming. The entire genre has become a licence to print money and shows no sign of slowing down. That’s not to say every film has been a success, but the general rule of low costs and easy returns has made it most profitable. Horror and Anime are the only safe bets these days, with every other genre struggling to break even. Given that, it’s no surprise to see a trend of the odd horror movie getting a huge boost from hype and word of mouth. Last year it was “The Substance” that got the hype, this year it is “Weapons”. This is a movie from writer/director Zach Cregger (Whose previous movie “Barbarian” also landed on the hype wagon). It features an ensemble cast but primarily Josh Brolin and Julia Garner. Larkin Seiple provides cinematography and music is by the collaboration between Cregger and the “Holladay Brothers”.

One night, in the town of Maybrook, Pennsylvania, seventeen children from elementary school teacher “Justine Gandy”‘s (Garner) third-grade class suddenly ran from their homes at 2:17 a.m. and disappeared. Only one student, “Alex Lilly” (Cary Christopher), remained. The story picks up two years later and follows the lives of various characters impacted by this event as they try and move on with their lives and get to the bottom of what happened. Specifically Justine, parent “Archer” (Brolin), Police Officer “Paul” (Alden Ehrenreich), junkie “James” (Austin Abrams) and the surviving child Alex. But to figure it out they must get over their own mistrust of each other first.

Narrative Technique

There are several movies that tell a story from multiple characters perspective. It’s one of a few techniques that allow the writers to hide important information from the viewer while still constructing a compelling narrative. The other main way of doing this is by telling the story out of order (Such as in “Memento” or “Strange Darlings”). The advantage with giving character perspectives is that you can change events based on how a human remembers them, adding in the “Unreliable narrator”. Weapon’s doesn’t really do this. Instead, it’s more like the time jump technique but without a set protagonist. In that regard it’s more comparable to “Strange Darlings” than a film like “Rashomon”.

The technique does had it’s advantages here. Effectively how it works is to give you a little more both at the start and end of the story with each new character. Our final character provides us with both the start and end of the story. There are a few horrors that recontextualize the timeline with it’s conclusion. There’s several that hold off from showing the true beginning of the story until the end. But I can’t think of any that progresses it in quite the same way. So point for originality there. The structure keeps the mystery alive far longer that a straight forward narrative could (Even if it held back the true beginning).

Unravelling The Mystery

The movie gives a very good atmosphere throughout. While I’m avoiding spoilers, so won’t reveal the nature of the evil in this story, I will say that I approve. It’s rare that this particular horror archetype is actually scary. A bit like vampires being made into sexy/romantic characters, this archetype is usually portrayed as heroic, misunderstood, sexy or an allegory for… Well that would give it away. So I appreciate that. Perhaps not as much as I appreciated Nosferatu and Last Voyage of the Demeter making Vampires scary again, but I do approve. This is a fairly long horror and the pacing is steady. Definite slow burn, but not one that will have you checking your watch.

Where I have some issues with the story is that it requires a seriously incompetent police investigation to work. Really almost anyone in that town not doing even the vaguest bit of investigation would have figured it out. Of course that is basically what did happen, but only after two entire years of it not crossing anyone’s mind to plot likely paths of the children for intersections. The evil plan was ultimately never going to work We’re also seeing a power level that is so off the charts that it draws into question the need for such a crazy plan. There’s a lot here that falls apart if you think about it too much.

Conclusion

Overall, this is a very impressive horror movie. If you remember my “Wolf Man” (2025) review earlier in the year you may remember that Julia Garner was the lead of that movie as well. So she gets the “Skarsgård” award for being in both the strongest and weakest horror film of the year. If you don’t get the reference, Bill Skarsgård was in both the abysmal “Crow” remake last year and the magnificent “Nosferatu”. So this is becoming a bit of a redemption arc trend. Anyway, Garner wasn’t the problem with “Wolf Man” and she’s actually very good here. The whole cast is pretty solid to be fair.

Ultimately this is a film that gives a great first experience in watching. It has definite flaws (Such as incompetent police and FBI investigations) and I am not sure it will maintain my appreciation through too many re-watches. But it’s one of the most original horror films I’ve seen for years and is well deserving of a strong 7/10. Highly recommended.

Rating: 7 out of 10.

Together (2025)

A horror movie that got a bit of hype this year (Though not as much as “Weapons”) was Michael Shanks feature film directorial debut “Together”. Written and directed by Shanks (Not the Stargate actor btw), but designed as a vehicle for husband and wife actors Dave Franco and Alison Brie. This is a loud and proud body horror, with the trailer being pretty clear with the viewers where the movie is headed. The two leads are joined by Damon Herriman as the only other cast member of note. Cinematography is by Germain McMicking and music by Cornel Wilczek.

Millie Wilson (Brie) and Tim Brassington (Franco) move to the countryside so that Millie can take up a job teaching elementary school English. This is tough on Tim, who is dealing with the recent passing of his parents, can’t drive and is trying to pursue a career as a musician. Despite his issues, he loves Millie and their bond is strong. It’s about to get a lot stronger though. After going on a hike around the nearby forest the pair fall into a cave during a rainstorm and are forced to stay there for the night. They wake, to find their legs stuck together by something, but are able to separate them. Over the next few days though the pair are inexplicably drawn to each other and find their bodies fusing together. They desperately try and stay apart, while figuring out what is happening.

Chemistry

This is certainly an interesting film. The big negative here is that it really doesn’t do that much more than what you already see in the trailer. The basic premise is basically, this thing is happening to this couple. Eventually they get a little info on it, but it doesn’t really add anything. There were no extra layers beyond what I already knew going in. This is two lovers, being forced physically together in a body horror film. That’s it. It’s also worth noting there is still (At the time of writing) a law suit alleging this film is a rip off of the 2023 film “Better Half”. The script for which was apparently pitched to Brie and Franco in 2020, but they declined. It’s hard to know the truth, but this kind of thing happens all the time in Hollywood.

The big positive of this film is the two stars. Brie and Franco are married in real life (And have been since 2017) so unsurprisingly, they have great chemistry together. You do truly get the impression they are in love and this is what makes the film really work. The body horror stuff isn’t really that shocking if you’ve watched much Cronenberg. The plot is also minimal and feels linear. On top of this, movie has a tiny cast and so puts all the weight on the two leads. Fortunately between the chemistry and the fact they are both good actors, it makes the movie work. Brie especially shines here. There’s also some solid cinematography and direction from Germain McMicking and Michael Shanks respectively.

Two Become One

One surprising thing is this is really a bit of a black comedy. It’s not like there is a lot of humour here, but it is present. Most specifically in one situational bit and a one line joke about diazepam. That joke made me laugh but it was in the middle of one of the most intense scenes of the film, so not really where I was expecting to be laughing. Honestly, not sure how I feel about that one. I’m swaying towards it being a demonstration of the characters chemistry and okay. That said, using the Spice Girls “Two Become One” song, felt a little too goofy for the film. Interestingly two out of three of these elements are key parts of the “Better Half” lawsuit, and that film is more of a comedy.

Overall this is a pretty good body horror. It’s not something I’m likely to want to re-watch. It’s not likely to become a cult classic or get Oscar nominations (Like “The Substance” did last year). But if you like body horror or romantic horror it’s worth watching. If you like both then I definitely recommend it. I’m giving this a solid 6/10. It would be higher, but I don’t feel like I got much more from the movie than I did the trailer. This is the execution of a basic idea and not much else. If the trailer got your interest, give it a watch. But don’t expect to be blown away.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

Alien Earth (Episodes 4-6)

Well after three more episodes I think it is time to update my review. That said, the jury is still out on this one. I’ve never come across a series I find so much to both love and hate about at once. That’s not to say it’s all extreme one way or the other, there is a lot of “Meh” to go about too. It is frankly all over the place. So let’s go over the Good, the bad and the Meh first and then’ll I’ll give you a score per episode.

Everybody Loves Eyeball Squid

No, that’s not a new sitcom, though I would probably watch it. We’re starting with the good and top of that list is Eyeball Squid. By far the coolest of the new species introduced in this show and one that could probably have worked in it’s own movie. Probably not it’s own TV series, but I could definitely see (pun not intended) it working for a movie. The creature is mysterious, creepy as hell and totally original. Of course where there is mystery there is room for disappointment. But so far, so good. The other new aliens, while not interesting enough for their own movie are also positives. We finally saw the bug-fly things in action in episode 6 and so the only creature not to have done anything of note is the plant pod. I’m sure it’s time will come.

Timothy Olliphant and Babou Ceesay continue to be the stand out actors. In episode five we learn more information about Morrow (Ceesay), which humanizes him somewhat. He continues to be a solid antagonist though. Olliphant’s Kirsh also continues to play the stealth antagonist. His goals are still no clearer and mostly he just reminds me of Michael Fassbender’s “David” in Prometheus/Covenant. That is a rogue android with his own agenda and no real care for humanity. Of course he could end up to simply be part of a scheme of one corporation boss or another, but I think he is more likely rogue. Adrian Edmondson is doing quite well as a secondary antagonist too. Small role, but he plays it well. Vyvyan has come a long way since the Young Ones.

A Xenomorph May Be Involved

So, let’s talk about the negatives and with this series its biggest issue is the continued massive dump from orbit the show keeps doing on to Ellen Ripley and the movie “Aliens”. The first movie is a little more protected since all that matters for that one is that the crew (Ash aside) are oblivious to the creatures. In Aliens however a team of space marines take Ripley along as the “Expert” on these unknown creatures. They take her because she’s the only person that has encountered them before. The Marines have no knowledge of these creatures and are woefully unprepared for what they are walking in to. Many people prefer Aliens to the original movie (I love both, but generally prefer the first). It’s objectively one of the best sequels ever made.

In Aliens, Gorman says the word “Xenomorph” as a general way of saying “Alien species”. He was informing the marines that they may be facing an alien life form of some kind. He wasn’t saying this specific, well known species. Since this was a cool word and not one that you’d hear in other franchises, fans started to use it to refer to the creatures themselves. Some because they didn’t understand the scene, others just for convenience (Since “Alien” doesn’t really narrow down what you are talking about). But now, in Alien: Earth they have twice deliberately used the word “Xenomorph” to refer to this specific species. It’s bad enough that it reveals a strange familiarity with them, but it also totally recontextualizes that scene in Aliens.

Why Is This A Prequel?

The problem goes beyond just the name, it also goes to the context. Ripley was meant to be the expert on these creatures and yet now thanks to this being a prequel her inclusions seems like a sick joke. Already Weyland-Yutani had a huge amount of information on the creatures. Now they even named it and when Gorman mentions the name in Aliens, he’s talking about a specific species and the space marines all seem to know exactly what he’s talking about. The series shows tactics and weapons designed to deal with the creatures and yet the marines head in spraying bullets in a way that was always destined to get them them covered in acid. Even if all the characters on this island die, Weyland-Yutani will still have their information. Man, space marines are morons.

So, why is this a prequel? So far I haven’t seen a single thing that means this show needed to be set before Alien. Almost all of these problems go away if it is a sequel instead of a prequel. Adopting the fan name for the creature is still dumb, but it doesn’t break past movies. If they introduced the black goo then at least it would make some sense as a prequel to Alien: Romulus, but then that shouldn’t have been a prequel either! Anyway, that aside my main complaint is how everyone is stupid. So much of this plot relies on stupidity to happen. It’s not a deal breaker for a horror series, but it is annoying.

Enough With The Peter Pan Stuff!

On to the Meh. I’m so very bored with the constant Peter Pan references. One of the characters themselves drew attention to how the analogy doesn’t even make sense in the first place since Kavalier is giving children adult bodies and expecting them to act like adults. This is the opposite to “Never growing up”. It’s something so dumb and obvious that the dumb characters in the show actually call it out. But it is relentless and it plays into another aspect of the show and that is it’s tendency to slow right down to a crawl for little to no benefit.

Another problem is I still don’t like either of the protagonists or really any of the characters at all. I appreciate Morrow and Kirsh, but they are antagonists, so I don’t actually like them. I don’t even appreciate Kavalier. To be fair some antagonists are there to make you want to see them get killed later on and I’m pretty sure the shoe fits here. But you are supposed to like the good guys. Joe has no agency outside of his sister and apparently little personality. Wendy meanwhile is that mixture of nativity and confidence that just makes you want to see them choke on their own hubris. It’s not endearing. The rest of the hybrid children are just as bad and this has been a constant since episode one.

Episode 4 – Do You See What Eye See

This was the episode that made Eyeball Squid everyone’s favourite. It didn’t even need to do a whole lot, but it was so well done it made the episode. The rest was a mixture of interesting and stupid. It did give me some theories about the hybrid androids having some kind of relationship with the black goo, but since that hasn’t been shown or talked about in this show (And is divisive with fans anyway), I’m probably way off. In the end the answer to how Wendy is communicating with the Aliens may just end up being “Because the plot needed that to happen”. We will see. This was a decent episode. 6/10

Episode 5 – A Prequel’s Prequel

I am already annoyed by the series being a prequel. So when I realized this episode was a prequel to that prequel, I wasn’t impressed. We get to see the events that lead to the ship crash on earth. We already know there will only be one survivor so the stakes here do not exist. Fortunately though the episode excelled in it’s execution. I mentioned in my previous review I was a big fan of the set design for the space ship and said it was a shame we didn’t see more of it. Here we did and it’s largely a stand alone Alien movie. Though one with a known outcome. The reason for holding this episode back was for one reveal about why the ship crashed. Barely seemed worth it, but the truth is this was the best episode yet. 7/10

Episode 6 – A Bad Day in the Lab

And then we are back to the main story and I can’t help but feel disappointed by it. This was another mostly slow episode that really hit us around the face with Peter Pan nonsense while very little happened. However, when it did happen it was pretty cool and went some way to redeeming the episode. We finally get to see the sixth alien species and it didn’t disappoint. Not as cool as Eyeball Squid, but who is? There was good here including a scene between Oliphant and Ceesay, but it wasn’t really enough for me to call this a good episode. 5.5/10

Conclusion – Marginal Improvement

So the good news is overall these three episodes have raised my average score (Slightly) and I am swaying more to the positive with the show. If this wasn’t a prequel I may even have been up to a 7/10 by now. However, the characters being idiots and the “Good” guys being unlikable would have held it from landing much higher. It is a prequel though and so it does still run a wrecking ball through the franchise. Still, the atmosphere is good, the creatures are fun and there is enough of interest here to have me speculating.

I’m also glad the obvious “Bloke in a suit” movement of the Alien in episode one and two hasn’t been repeated, so visually the show is improving too. If you haven’t watched the series yet, I think I can call it a cautious recommendation now. I’m raising the score to 6.5/10. Technically the average is only just over 6/10 but I feel a 6.5 is fair. We have two more episodes to go, so I’ll check in with you again when it is all over. A bad or good ending will make or break this series, so there is everything still to play for.

Rating: 6.5 out of 10.

28 Years Later (2025)

These days it is never considered too late for a sequel. So it’s not a shock to see Danny Boyle and Alex Garland dig up their “28” franchise. Its been 23 years since the pair launched the series with “28 Days Later” in 2002. The first sequel “28 Weeks Later” came out in 2007. Boyle and Garland were largely uninvolved as they were busy filming “Sunshine” (2007). With an 18 year gap between sequels, they have opted to go straight for 28 years later and skip past the obvious “28 months” option. The thinking seems to be that after such a long period they can effectively give the series a solid reboot. Unsurprisingly everything you need to know about this world is explained in the movie. You don’t have to watch either of the previous movies.

Also returning alongside Boyle and Garland is cinematographer Anthony Dodd. Not returning however is composer John Murphy, who has been replaced by progressive Hip-Hop group “Young Fathers”. I’ve actually seen them live, supporting Massive Attack (Another group known to dabble in soundtracks). Unsurprisingly there are no returning characters (Though since this is a planned trilogy, rumour is there will be returns down the line). Instead this movie stars a young Alfie Williams as “Spike”, Jodie Corner as “Isla”, Spike’s mother and Aaron Taylor-Johnson as “Jamie”, Spike’s father. Support comes mostly from Raph Fiennes as the eccentric “Dr Ian Kelson” and Edvin Ryding as “Erik” a Swedish soldier.

Survival

28 years after the outbreak of the “Rage” virus a group of survives have built a community on a small island isolated from the mainland (Except at low tide). The rage virus turns humans into feral killers, but after such a long time the infected have begun to evolve somewhat. The most notable of these changes is the appearance of “Alpha’s”, far stronger monsters that are especially hard to kill. The Paris outbreak reported on in 28 Weeks Later appears to have been retconned. Instead the UK is the only place effected and as such has been placed in permanent quarantine. A naval blockade surrounds the country shooting down anyone attempting to flee. The survivors are truly alone.

Living on this island is Spike and his parents. His father Jamie is a scavenger, tasked with braving the mainland to find supplies. A dangerous job and Spike is set to follow in his father’s footsteps. Despite his young age, he is ready for his first foray out into the dangers of the mainland. Spike’s mother, Isla is suffering from a mysterious illness and appears to be on her deathbed. The island has no Doctor, so there is not much that can be done. After narrowly surviving his first trip outside, Spike discovers that there may be a doctor on the mainland that could potentially save his mother and so he sets out with her to find him, whatever the risk.

Three Unequal Parts

This is a movie of three distinct sections. The section is effectively an epilogue and lead in to the next movie. Fortunately that section is short because it doesn’t fit with the rest of the movie and is frankly… stupid. The entire tone shifts gratingly and we go from a dark, thoughtful apocalyptic movie to outright B-Movie action cheese and ridiculous parody in the blink of an eye. It’s a bit like if you watched “The Road” (2009) and then in the last five minutes it turned into “Turbo Kid” (2015). Two great movies, but their tone doesn’t mix well. I have no idea what Boyle and Garland were thinking, but I don’t have high hopes for the sequel.

Now, that out of the way it’s important to let you know the rest of the film is actually good. The other two main parts are Spike’s journey with his father and then his more personal one with his mother. The two journeys contrast nicely and in it’s own way the movie examines the very different roles of fatherhood and motherhood. The latter provides a far more emotional journey and is the highlight from an acting perspective. Both Alfie and Jodie are remarkably good in their very demanding roles. By contrast, the first half where Jamie is trying to train Spike is both a very solid father/son story and much more of what you would expect from a zombie movie.

Bones To Pick

Despite the emotional pay off of the second half of the movie, it does start to have issues with consistency. The tone starts to get a bit more silly with the introduction of a Swedish soldier, whose boat has sunk and is now stranded. It wasn’t a big issue, but given what was to come it probably was a warning sign. Another issue here is just how well and how quickly Spike went from panic and struggling to shoot straight when out with his dad to a confident mainland survivor. There is also one plot event that just felt… unlikely (But no spoilers). It’s not a deal breaker though and I still enjoyed this section. For most though I think the film will peak early.

One thing I definitely approve of here is that the zombies (I mean “Infected”) are not just a colourful background to post-apocalyptic humans being generally awful to each other. That is something that is so overdone in zombie stories (Largely thank to the endless stream of Walking Dead shows). The original 28 Days later had a fair bit of this itself, but was relatively well balanced. That’s not to say the film focuses on the infected, they are still somewhat of a backdrop but the story is a much more personal one. For me, a zombie film needs to have an element of tragedy to it and making the story smaller and more personal allows for that.

Conclusion

Despite the horrendous misstep at the end, this is still a good story with enjoyable action. The visuals are good (Zombie wangs aside, I could have done without those), the acting is superb and the pacing is decent. The zombie evolution reminds me of a cross between Romero’s “Land of the Dead” (2005) and a video game like “Left 4 Dead”. I’m not sure how much it really added to the story. The first half of the movie is a good 7/10, the second a 6.5/10 and the final 5 minutes a 4/10. Fortunately the story is effectively over before the epilogue so it doesn’t ruin it. I’m giving this a strong 6.5/10

Rating: 6.5 out of 10.

Werewolf Triple Bill – Part II

The full moon is up again here at Screen-Wolf, so it’s time for another werewolf triple bill. I think I’ve finally washed the bad taste of “Wolf Man” (2025) out of my mouth, so this will be the last one for now. Here are three more reviews of this difficult to pull off sub-genre of horror. Tonight I present you with “Bad Moon” from 1996, “Wolf Cop” from 2014 and “The Wolf of Snow Hollow” from 2020. One thing these all have in common is they are all from writer/directors (In the case of Snow Hollow also the star). So these are very much one man’s vision, yet each vision is radically different. I love the posters for all three of these by the way. It’s always nice to not have to share generic giant head posters. Anyway, let’s take a bite out of these movies shall we?

The Wolf of Snow Hollow (2020)

“The Wolf of Snow Hollow” is from actor/writer/director Jim Cummings, who also stars in the movie. This black comedy horror is his second feature, after his acclaimed “Thunder Road” (2018) debut. He is supported by Riki Lindhome, Chloe East, Jimmy Tatro and Robert Forster (In his final performance). Cinematography is from Natalie Kingston and music is provided by Ben Lovett. The 2020 indie movie was made for a mere $2 million and clocks in at only 84 minutes. Cumming’s plays Jon Marshall, a Deputy Sheriff and struggling alcoholic with anger management issues and young daughter.

After a vacationer discovers the mangled body of his girlfriend at their rental house in Snow Hollow, the police begin a manhunt for her killer. Deputy Sheriff Marshall takes the lead. When a second victim is found with her head and arm torn off and wolf fur found at the scene the investigation takes a turn for the macabre. Marshall refuses to believe this can be a werewolf. He is hampered though by his struggle with alcoholism and his conflicts with those around him, including his daughter. No one seems to have faith in Marshall’s ability to solve this case, least of all himself.

Anger Management

This is one of those horror comedies that forgets to be either funny or scary. As a dark comedy, you expect this somewhat as usually the humour comes from quirky characters and odd situations. Here though it seems the comedy is meant to come from the incompetence of the police, and it just doesn’t land for me. Dark comedies are tricky though, as are werewolf movies, so they set themselves a difficult task here. The movie also falls prey to a lot of the cliches of more recent film making. None of the characters are likeable and the movie seems to be trying to present a message about toxic masculinity. It’s not preachy, but it is a bit too on the nose. Possibly the problem is the movie is a little too focused on it’s lead (and writer/director).

That said, the movie has some positives. The attacks are well filmed (For the budget). The cast is reasonable and the identity of the killer isn’t obvious. The only problem was the character wasn’t really involved in the plot much, so you had no reason to suspect them. Honestly I didn’t actually care who it was by the end. This tends to be a problem with “Guess the Werewolf” films. There is another twist in regards to the werewolf that was a bit more predictable, given the nature of the film. Ultimately the ending fell flat for me. The rest of the film I’d call solid, except for actively disliking the protagonist. Creatively that is fine, but it is harder to like a movie when you think the protagonist is a dick. Anyway, this is a solid 5/10. Not terrible, but not a recommendation.

Rating: 5 out of 10.

Wolf Cop (2014)

“Wolf Cop” is a low budget Canadian horror comedy from writer/director Lowell Dean. Staring Leo Fafard and Amy Matysio. It is very much a Saskatchewan production, shot entirely in Regina, Saskatchewan, largely featuring natives of the area and with a soundtrack from “Shooting Guns”, an instrumental Metal band from Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. The production budget of $1 million was granted through a canadian film contest. The concept won through social media engagements and fan votes against nearly 100 rivals.

The movie follows “Lou Garou” (Fafard), an alcoholic cop in the small town of Woodhaven. Lou is mocked and disrespected by most of the locals, especially the criminals. He spends most of his time sleeping or at a local bar (Even when on duty). After investigating a report of devil worshipers he stumbles upon the murder of a local politician and is knocked out. He awakens later with no memory and a pentagram carved into his stomach. That isn’t the only change as his facial hair is now rapidly growing and his senses are heightened. That is just the start of it as eventually Lou finds himself turning into a Wolf Man. Not a feral beast though, but one that is still very much Lou – A alcoholic and a cop. As he looks into what happens he begins to discover a vast conspiracy.

It’s the Fuzz

If the name was not a give away, this is very much on the “Fun B-Movie” side of horror films. It is fully aware of what it is, but doesn’t go so overboard. They avoid falling into the trap of trying too hard to be bad. The movie actually starts out somewhat like The Wolf of Snow Hollow, with a small town, a washed up alcoholic cop as the lead, a more competent female deputy and a Sheriff that is largely uninvolved for most of the movie. That’s where the similarities end though. The comedy in this movie is obvious, the gore over the top and the identity of the Werewolf… well, it’s in the title of the film! The film offers few surprises but generally delivers exactly what you would hope for.

Unsurprisingly they have gone for more of a “Wolf Man” werewolf instead of something more wolf-like or monstrous. That approach is usually chosen to allow a little bit more humanity in the character. This is the case here, however it’s not for sympathy but rather to allow Wolf Cop to deliver the occasional one liner and to use his gun. Yes, this film features a werewolf that shoots people. It’s also the rare situation of a werewolf that is basically good, even in monster form. The movie still provides monstrous villains however. Despite the comparatively straight forward make up job of the “Wolf” form they actually do put effort into a unique and impressive and quite funny transformation. This is a fun movie that is much better than it probably had any right to be. Shockingly, I’m giving it a solid 6/10.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

Bad Moon (1996)

“Bad Moon” comes from writer/director Eric Red. Eric is best known as a writer and penned the horror classics “The Hitcher” (1986) and “Near Dark” (1987). This is another Canadian movie, this time from Morgan Creek Productions and with a significantly higher budget (Especially with inflation) of $7 million. It is based on the novel “Thor” by Wayne Smith. The movie stars Mariel Hemingway, with support from Michael Paré and Mason Gamble. All reasonable mid tier actors that never quite made it to the big time. Paré is all over genre entertainment and usually safe casting, so no surprise to see him here. Cinematography comes from Jan Kiesser and the score is provided by Daniel Licht (Who is most famous for scoring the TV series “Dexter”).

During an expedition to Nepal, photographer Ted Harrison (Paré) and his girlfriend are attacked by a werewolf. Paré survives but as a result now carries the curse. He returns home and hides away in his remote lakeside cabin to try and find a way to cure his condition or live with it. After reaching out to his remaining family, his sister “Janet” (Hemingway) and her son “Brett” (Gamble) he agrees to move his trailer to the back of their house and stay with them. While he struggles with his condition in secret, the families dog “Thor”, suspects the truth and instinctively wants to protect his family from the danger.

Man’s Beast Friend

Of this round of reviews “Bad Moon” is undoubtedly the most traditional werewolf story. We know who the werewolf is from the start and he transforms into the standard “Howling” style beast. The creature actually looks pretty good, better than I expected. But then, back in 1996 there were a lot physical effects masters around and no drive to use CGI (For this kind of film anyway). Although we see a bit of the tragedy of the cursed lycanthrope, the focus is more on his sister and nephew. It’s not really their story either though and that is the real twist with this movie. The lead of this movie is the families’ dog “Thor”. It’s a novel approach that isn’t without issues, but it did make this werewolf movie stand out from the pack.

The plot itself is stripped down and straightforward, but it didn’t really need to do anything more complicated. The characters are likable enough and have a little depth, mostly from the conflicted nature of dealing with a loved family member turning into a monster. The tragic aspect of the story could have had a little more to it. Ted flips at some point from a sympathetic character to an outright villain and the change is a little jarring. Part of the reason for this is that he isn’t the focal character. Janet fairs a little better and you do feel her internal conflict in the situation. Thor though is the star, but even this could have been explored a little more thoroughly. The truth is this straight forward movie does just enough to make it work. Not outstanding, but just about worthy of a 6/10.

Rating: 6 out of 10.