Categories: Movie and Series Reviews, Horror

The Deep House (2021) 1.5/5

It is actually very shallow. After watching the flick, a quick search showed that the leads are as follows: someone who primarily identifies as a model and Jagger’s son. She does a serviceable job. He does something else. I really needed to know why he seemed so out of place, and that explains it enough for me.

What is worse, is the wastefulness of the setting. The movie initially holds some promise. How exciting is it to do a haunted house film underwater? That is a great idea! So why then is the whole house experience cliche after cliche! It is absurd because the setting actually works and the film stands a little taller despite what may have been a smaller budget, and yet it inflicts self-wound after self-wound while trying its best to sap out any originality that held promise.

Also, why are the only two characters for the majority of the movie constantly calling out to each other by name? Even underwater, wired directly to one another, they constantly speak to each other in this weird way. You would think that they had just met, not that they were partners.

I’m mostly just frustrated after watching The Deep House. A great idea does not make a film alone, and the execution here just is not it. Not the direction, not the script, and the cast is tied down. The movie is haunted.

Apocalypse Z (2024) 3/5

Apocalypse Z, with its slower patient beginnings, makes you think it may offer unique insights. Those never come though and everything the movie does is completely predictable to even the most undiscerning of eyes. However, as a dumb zombie flick there is still something here. A lot of tired repeats of the genre are avoided and those that are there are fleeting, so it is not an offensive outing in a well worn path.

On the audio side, I feel the need to speak out against the use of pig sounds for zombies as it completely ruins any enjoyment of those moments. Visually it is up and down, with most sights being solid and others feeling like old Syfy channel flicks made on pocket change. The cast is great though, from little old ladies to our lead.

If the movie were a bit more clever and less by-the-numbers then maybe it would be more than middle of the road. However, I have read that this is a part 1 of a series, so perhaps we will get to see a bit more ambition in a sequel. I certainly have enough good will to watch another.

Oddity (2024) 4/5

Oddity is excellent at building tension and has perhaps one of the creepiest scenes I have seen in a movie. However, I can’t help but feel it would have benefited from telegraphing itself a little less. That being said, I think the story is strengthened by its patient telling through a carefully constructed atmosphere that chills.

I am also pleased by the handling of jumps and visual horror. I am not to keen on being startled but I felt like each was led into rather than cheaply surprised. I also find a lot of visual violence hard to appreciate, and so I enjoyed that only the aftermath is ever shown.

Ultimately, I am in a bit of a spot on how to rank this movie. I want to say Oddity is a flawless movie, but I find myself longing a bit more for the cards to be held a bit closer to the chest and for characterizations to be little less on the nose.

You will benefit a lot from skipping the trailer or synopses for this one, I know I did.

Alien Resurrection (1997) 2/5

Whedon does not get a pass for this. I had to search for this, he commented that the movies script was mostly intact but the direction was bad. Then he commented the casting was bad later. Everything was bad except his script.

Don’t get me wrong, the direction is extra bad and there are bits where you could see the writers intent vs what we got, but its bad. A tone correction to pronouncing fork would not have fixed this mess. I don’t think this would have been a Serenity, and I don’t think jokes about Walmart show any appreciation for the setting. Whedon is not one to take blame though, clearly.

It is amazing how many recognizable faces are in this and yet how squandered it all is. Whedon complained about typcasting but I think actors who know how to play a type is a small issue in the grand scheme. Winona Ryder is the only one who seems to struggle a bit, with any other issues being down to directors interpretation of scenes. That direction will definitely be noticeable though, as at the time the director did not speak english and I believe this is why jokes are often said loudly or seriously.

There are just far too many nonsense things that happen and make no sense. Also, basketball. In general though, it feels as though Whedon didn’t really get what came before. Established things are not taken seriously, like if a face-hugger gets on you all the way then you probably aren’t getting it off.

Being brave with a series isn’t the worst. A franchise like Scream has suffered from beating the same drum over and over again in my opinion. I think the idea of injecting more humor, as the script seemed to want to do, isn’t necessarily wrong. The first movie was horror, then action, then whatever the third was (worse action?), and this could have been a blend or some such. It needs to respect the foundations though, and it struggles to find any footing.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988) 1.5/5

I cannot be bothered to do more than a list with this one.

-Tuesday Knight is a big downgrade from Patricia Arquette as Kristen Parker from the prior film.
-Wasted the prior cast. They should have just moved on or focused on the actual returning actors.
-A step back in acting.
-It feels super reductive to go back to the mother undermining things again.
-Lazy work. No room rotation when you expect it and unsmooth jumps in camera work throughout.
-Some really bad deaths, very lazy.
-Revisiting the doubt from everyone is lame and makes no sense after characters acknowledge they know the story, like it is more common knowledge that odd stuff happened.
-Passing powers is stupid.
-Our man, Fred, is not very scary here.
-Wounds don’t manifest in the real world. They established in the last movie that they did, its why Fred had to make it look like some of them were hurting themselves before. It is a lazy way to perpetuate everyones doubt this time.
-The Dream Master stuff is dumb and heavy handed.
-The dojo stuff. Why invisible? Why does it only reflect the kids personality and not also Fred’s? This was so dumb.
-“Daydream” scene is dumb. I would have accepted micronapping.

Blah, I say. Blah.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987) 3.5/5

Dream Warriors is not perfect. If I spoke to any diehard fan of the series, I bet they would give me grief for liking this more than the first. Yes the first flick has a darker tone and Fred feels scarier, but it is also wildly inconsistent in quality. As this is my first time running through all of the movies, I have only seen 1, 2, and 3 so far, but I recall the first had some of the very best scenes and also things like oatmeal stairs, prop dummy mom, and a lot of awkward running.

Three is an imperfect movie that is consistently imperfect. It only goes a bit far with the expansion of the origin, but it was not so bad as to feel ruinous like a lot of the second movie was.

Oh and “dream deprivation” is a phrase nobody should ever say. The extra camp though? If we can forgive the silly budget stuff in the first movie then a Jason and the Argonauts style fight at the junkyard is hardly something to fuss about. Plus I like the idea more than what we got in two, it felt as if he wasn’t strong enough to fully materialize but could basically mess with the environment some. Oh and the wizard stuff? It made sense for that character, as they were giving all of the kids some sort of identity and he was a fellow dork.

I am going to be in a small crowd, but I kind of like Dream Warriors the most so far.