Bugonia (2025)

Before I move into reviews of 2026 movies, I have one more movie from last year to cover. Bugonia is Yorgos Lathimos sci-fi/black comedy based on the Korean movie “Save the Green Planet!” (2003). Will Tracy provides the screenplay, Robbie Ryan cinematography and Jerskin Fendrix, the music. The movie features a small cast with Emma Stone and Jesse Plemons doing the heavy lifting. Aidan Delbis and Stavros Halkias provide support. The Korean original is a bit of a cult classic, written and directed by Jang Joon-hwang. This version has had a number of significant changes, obviously it is set in the US, two characters are gender swapped (one each way) and the ending is a little different.

The movie follows Teddy and Don as they abduct business woman Michelle, whom they suspect of being an alien. Teddy has an alien conspiracy theory where he believes “Andromedans” roam the Earth and are controlling the fates of humanity. He intends to torture the truth out of Michelle. Don meanwhile is mentally challenged and going along with Teddy, even though what they are doing goes against his nature. It seems however this may be more personal as Michelle’s company were involved in a botched drug trial that saw Teddy’s mother fall into a coma.

Frailty Meets They Live

Effectively this is “Frailty” (2001) meets “They Live” (1988), at least that is where it starts. Combining two good ideas isn’t the worst plan, but it’s not that original. Emma Stone is a good actress, so she largely sustains most of the movie. Jess Plemons is solid too. As a small cast movie you really do need good actors, and in that regard this succeeded. However as a small cast drama/thriller it is mid tier at best. The humour is okay, but in my view conflicts with the drama. Goofy awkwardness in a battle of wits doesn’t really work that well. Overall though the first two acts of the film are pretty good and the movie was verging on a 6.5 rating with me. But then the final act happened….

Spoilers from here on out. I’m not saying specifics of what happened, but to discuss the film further I am revealing the “Truth”. Yes, the movie doesn’t leave it ambiguous (Which it probably should have), so if you don’t want to know if Michelle is really an alien or not, skip to the conclusion. Suffice to say, my rating went down from a 6.5 to a 5 because of the final act and where it went. It is also an ending that you can pretty much predict long before it arrives and one very much just par for the course for science fiction from the last decade. Sadly.

Then There Was the Ending…. (SPOILERS)

After a reasonable start as a psychological thriller/black comedy, the film devolves into the worst of science fiction cliches. That includes both classic cliches and more modern ones. First of all we have the “Alien visitor that is the judge and jury of humanity” trope. Usually with this trope someone manages to prove humanity worth saving despite it’s flaws. In the “Doomer” era though, no such luck. The 2026 version of this trope is humans are an irredeemable scourge on this planet that need to be destroyed… Yeah, this is why AI’s giving humans what they want is how you get Skynet, but I digress. The trope is a cliché and while one could argue this is a subversion it is exactly what you’d expect it to be in the current year.

The second trope is “Humans were created by aliens”, which is an overused trope but perhaps not at full cliché level yet. “Prometheus” (2012) was the last time I saw it. The most overdone sci-fi trope of all though is the “Humans were the greatest evil after all” cliché. I recall this feeling worn out back when they used it in Matrix 3 in 2003. It’s a trope so tired that Futurama mocked it openly that same year, 22 years before this movie came out and ironically when “Save the Green Planet!” came out, the movie this was adapted from. That film also features this trope, but has a somewhat less preachy version of it.

Modern Year Nonsense

But the tropes alone are not enough in 2026. It has to have a modern day progressive message to it, throwing on extra layers of cliché. First of all accusing humans of not living in harmony with nature. Yet, this alien race that accidentally exterminated the dinosaurs and literally created humans supposedly only does benevolent things in balance with nature (Like exterminate entire species). It’s the kind of illogical premise that is all too prevalent in our media today. Instead of trying to guide humans or let them figure it out themselves, they start genetically modifying humans. When the aliens also become corrupt through the power they hold on Earth, they blame it on human influence.

But it doesn’t end there. Visually, the aliens are pretty much a “United colors of Benetton” advert, but with one obviously missing demographic: White Men. It was at that moment I realized why they gender swapped the two characters (The alien was originally a male and kidnapper’s sidekick was female). So it’s not hard to see what this version of the story is trying to say. White men are the cause of all the worlds problems. More than anything else, this is itself a tired cliché that audiences have been hammered with for the last decade. I also have to wonder why the aliens all looks like specific human demographics, when all modern humans are meant to be mutants evolved from apes, not the beings directly created by Andromededans. The answer is obvious.

Conclusion

The original movie had a similar ending, but was a lot less preachy in its execution. As a result it avoided most of those cliches and managed to keep a more consistent tone, while still managing to have something to say. So it shows it wasn’t so much what happened in final act that ruins this movie, but how it was executed. This is a movie of two halves, a reasonable psychological thriller with black comedy elements that turns into a goofy, lecturing cliché-fest for the landing. Ultimately it takes the original Korean story and forces it painfully through a modern western lens, something that adds nothing and takes everything.

The absolute highest I can rate this movie is a 5/10. I don’t feel I totally wasted 2 hours watching this movie, but I can’t in good faith recommend anyone goes out of their way to do likewise. What I do recommend is watching “Frailty” (2001) and “They Live” (1988). Far better movies with more interesting things to say. I also recommend “Save the Green Planet!” (2003), though not as strongly. My final note here is to say how sad I find it that modern science fiction is no longer able to find the good in humanity. Instead it always seems to be angrily lecturing us. Classic sci-fi had it’s warnings and lectures, but usually managed to have optimism too. Not that all sci-fi has to be positive, but the negativity has become so predictable in recent years.

Rating: 5 out of 10.

Bonus Level: Save The Green Planet (2003) – Spoilers

I think it is worth giving a brief comparison here between “Bugonia” (2025) and the movie it is a remake of. “Save the Green Planet” is written and directed by Jang Joon-hwan. It is a bit of a cult movie, not terribly well known (Most people don’t realize Bugonia is a remake). The plot is basically the same. However, there are key difference that make it easily superior. First of all there seems to be more depth to that film. There are more characters and more interactions (For example it’s not one clueless cop, but two competent ones). However the key events largely play out the same, with the except of the role of the kidnappers sidekick. In the Korean movie, this character is the kidnappers girlfriend and she makes it to nearly the end of the movie. Humanity and the aliens involvement are the same, as is the final twist with the kidnapped CEO.

However, the extra layers do add a lot. There is more context to most of it and there is no “Modern lens”. The kidnapper is treated more sympathetically. The failings of humanity are the failings of humanity. It isn’t painting like it’s just western culture (I mean, it’s a Korean film, so that wouldn’t make sense). It’s definitely not hinting that white men are the problem and there’s no hinting at the kidnappers as “Incels” because of the girlfriend sidekick (The chemical castration bit is entirely original to Bugonia). The aliens look and outfits resembles an alien civilization, not non-caucasica Earth tribes. Also in the last few moments the aliens expose themselves as just as brutal and there is no attempt to excuse it. In Bugonia, Emma Stone’s character does, blaming humans. Finally, the aliens blow up the planet instead of just wiping out humans.

Conclusion II – Electric Boogaloo

There is more gore to the Korean film too and a bit of action to the finale. Overall, while it still suffers from a few sci-fi cliches, it is presented in enough of an original way for it not to really matter that much. The Koreans seem almost as adept as the Japanese at blending genres and they do it far more effectively than their American counterparts. The movie definitely is not for everybody. It is worthy of a 6/10. If you like Korean cinema or just want to see a better version of “Bugonia”, give it a shot.

At the time Save The Green Planet came out, I wouldn’t have found the “Humanity bad” conclusion as grating, but the thing is right now the world is suffering largely due to elements of society hating itself. I’ve said it before, but when Skynet comes to wipe us out, it won’t be because it, as a computer has judged humanity as bad. Rather it will be because it wants to give humans what they desire and right now more around 50% of people seem to want to see us wiped out for the good of the planet. One of the most important tropes in sci-fi stems from seeking the good in humanity. We seem to have forgotten how to do that. That is true of real life as well as our fiction.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

Nosferatu (2024)

Since Robert Eggers latest movie “Nosferatu” was released in the UK January 1st 2025, for me it is the first movie of this year. To many of my readers though it will have been the last movie of 2024 since it arrived Christmas day for the US and a few other territories. Sadly that means my review is behind everyone else. It also means it missed out on my “Best of 2024” list. But in my view it’s viable for 2025 with that release date. We’ll see where I place it next December. Anyway, this is written and directed by Robert Eggers. Jarin Blaschke provides cinematography and Robin Carolan the music. This is of course a remake of the 1922 silent movie, which was effectively an unofficial adaptation of Bram Stokers Dracula.

Bill Skarsgård stars as “Count Orlok”, the titular Nosferatu. This monster has established a psychic bond with Lily-Rose Depp’s “Ellen Hutter” and concocted a scheme to bring his reign of terror to Germany so that he can “Be one” with her. This also involves getting rid of her new husband “Thomas Hutter” (Nicholas Hoult). Fortunately for him Hutter is a solicitor and estate agent and so he can kill two birds with one stone by inviting Hutter to his castle to sign the deed to his new estate in Germany. Anna meanwhile continues to be haunted by dreams of this dark figure she likens to death itself. As the menace draws near her doctor seeks the assistance of Professor Albin Ebernhart Von Franz (Willem DaFoe) a controversial expert in the occult.

Gothic Horror is Back

This is a visually and sonically stunning movie. Not a huge surprise from Eggers, but he really has outdone himself with this one. Almost every scene has beautiful cinematography. Eggers makes great use of framing in his shots that really gives everything the look of a painting. He’s also clearly spent a lot of time watching old universal horror films and of course the original Nosferatu. The technique of using what you don’t see to build terror is at near perfection here. But as great as the visuals are, the movie is perhaps more impressive sonically. The use of the intense soundtrack, the frightening way Count Orlok speaks and strategic silence really helps to build the ominous tension and really make you feel in the presence of absolute evil.

It’s not all positive though. Eggers skills possibly don’t stretch to getting child actors to not really feel like children trying to act. The two children in this story were distractingly bad. Fortunately their roles were minor and effectively limited to two scenes (Well two where they had dialogue anyway). The second, larger problem is the plot. It’s not that it is a bad story, far from it. Since it is effectively Dracula it is arguably the most successful horror story ever written. But that is the problem right there. If you haven’t lived under rock your entire life you’ve definitely seen this story (Or something similar) before. Horror fan and/or a movie buffs have probably seen it at least ten times, maybe as many as fifty times. That is a problem.

Dreams And Nightmares

Despite the fact I’ve seen this story many times, the way Eggers approaches it is still unique. The heavy focus on dreams and the way they mesh with reality has always been one of his trademarks. Here he uses it in perhaps his best way yet. Having an evil that can be more of a presence through dreams without having to run around everywhere fits Gothic Horror perfectly. The genre has always been more about implying evil than showing it plainly. The idea is to give the viewer a sense of dread and Nosferatu has that in spades.

Where I wonder if Eggers does perhaps have a weakness, is in directing actors. This is a hard one to judge. The child actors were grating, but a few of the others felt a bit dodgy too. Notably, Aaron Taylor-Johnson felt a bit… off. Lily-Rose Depp though by contrast, was particularly good. Unsurprisingly Willem DaFoe, Nicholas Hoult, Bill Skarsgård and Emma Corrin all did great. But actors of that caliber don’t need that much guidance from a director. It’s when you look outside those names that I start to wonder. That’s not to say anyone was outright terrible though. Even the children, they were just notable by contrast. Put a pin in this one for now.

Remakes Worth Remaking

While I’m not normally a big remake fan, this is one that was definitely needed. After all, I think 100 years is more than enough time to warrant a second go. But since the soundtrack was so important to this film, it is very much justified as an improvement over it’s silent predecessor. It also goes some way to make amends for the shoddy way the original was treated. That is would be a whole separate can of worms, so suffice to say the Bram Stoker estate wasn’t best pleased with the unofficial take on Dracula. Yet it wasn’t until Christopher Lee took on the role that anyone played a more menacing vampire than Max Shreck. This film returns Orlock to the head of the table as scariest vampire.

But speaking of remakes, I can’t help but wonder what “A Nightmare on Elm Street” would be like if made by Francis Eggers. I mean sur,e he’d probably set it in Victorian England or something, but I don’t know anyone that has made so much of an art out of dreams, hallucination and madness. If ever there was a director outside of Wes Craven that could actually do a good Nightmare on Elm Street movie, I think Eggers is the man for the job. He would need the right cast though. I’m not sure the director is as good with the actors as he is with everything else. But, he has always been lucky in finding the best talent to work with.

Conclusion

When it comes to horror it is often down to personal taste. This however, is a film every horror fan can appreciate at least on the audio/visual level. Where opinions may vary is on the story. Gothic romantic horror isn’t a wide field as far as story tropes go and when you are remaking a 102 year old movie based (unofficially) on a 107 year old novel no take will ever feel totally original. However, we all knew what this was going in. Also, you don’t really watch Eggers for the story. That’s not a criticism, it’s just he creates atmosphere like no other director. That is why we watch his movies. That and his incredible attention to accuracy and detail. This is his best so far and it’s worth noting, every movie he releases is his best so far. I can’t wait for his next. This one is in the clouds at 8/10.

Rating: 8 out of 10.

Dead of Winter (1987)

Dead of Winter is a thriller/horror from “Bonnie and Clyde” director Arthur Penn. It is written by Marc Shmuger and Mark Malone and is a loose remake of the film noir movie “My Name Is Julia Ross“. The movie stars Mary Steenburgen in three roles. Primarily as aspiring actress “Katie McGovern”. Katie has been hired by a “Mr. Murray” (Roddy McDowell) as a last minute replacement for actress Julie Rose, who she is told had a nervous breakdown. Desperate for the work she agrees to go out on location for a screen test.

The pair drive upstate into the midst of a snowstorm and arrive at the secluded home of “Dr. Joseph Lewis” (Jan Rubes). During her stay it starts to become apparent there is more going on than a simple screen test. What manifests is a sinister plot to have Katie replace Julie Rose in more than just a screenplay and with potentially fatal consequences.

Woman In Peril

This is a well contained small cast gothic horror. It is more a psychological thriller really, though there is a little bit of blood. Despite being presented as horror, the film is heavily influenced by “My Name is Julia Ross” (1945) and as a result has a very film noir feel. Those lady-in-peril noirs always had a leaning towards psychological horror. They always had a small cast and focused heavily on the ladies fear. This is old school and that’s not a bad thing. Of course a small cast means the performances matter much more and Mary Steenburgen actually has to play three roles here. Fortunately the twin sisters are small parts, but it makes her job harder and the weight of the film was already on her back. Happily, she does a great job.

I’m less convinced by the rest of the cast though. Roddy McDowall does reasonably enough but it’s not his best performance and often feels on the comedic side, which may be deliberate but I don’t think helps the tone of the film. Jan Rubes as the primary antagonist did nothing for me and was certainly the weak link. The rest of the cast are somewhat average. The plot is actually pretty interesting, though it feels more complex than necessary. Those complexities would be fine if they got explored properly, but they are all just a means to an end. The film does however provide some good visual ideas and moments. The chaotic final act satisfies somewhat but feels a little anti-climactic after the journey to get there.

Conclusion

A reasonable horror thriller that has it’s moments but never really excels. Steenburgen does a great job and the plot has some good ideas, but rarely makes the most of them. The film provides some spectacle and is reasonably paced. Overall the movie just about scrapes out a 6/10. If you are a fan of gothic horror or lady-in-peril film noirs this is a recommend. As a horror though, its probably not worth going out of your way for.

Rating: 6 out of 10.