Rating: 3/5

This movie is nuckin futs. 

When I first heard the title of Cocaine Bear, I, like probably many others, questioned if it was a real movie. I recall looking it up immediately to find the trailer, and discovering that it was in fact legitimate and something I must watch. Though it may not be everyone’s cup of tea, Cocaine Bear delivers on exactly what it sets out to be; an absolutely ludicrous movie that never once takes itself seriously.

Cocaine Bear is truly ridiculous from beginning to end. Containing everything from a drug induced mammal vs. ambulance chase to a mild mannered detective worrying about the small fancy dog he accidentally adopted. Even though the general point of Cocaine Bear is just to be a comedic gore filled bear rampage, you still never 100% know what to expect. Even with such a short run time, I found myself wondering how it was all going to be resolved and what insanity would happen next. 

Honestly, you really have to admire this movie for completely throwing caution to the wind and just going for it. It may not be my favorite movie I’ve seen this year, but it was certainly an interesting and entertaining ride. I’m game for anything that gives Margo Martindale a chance to shine, which Cocaine Bear absolutely does. I saw some reviews which dinged this movie for being too ridiculous and stupid, which to that I say, you watched a movie called Cocaine Bear, what did you expect?

Rating: 3.75/5

Scream VI was quite the pleasant surprise.

Following the relative success of the first franchise reboot, I can easily say that I liked Scream VI more than its recent counterpart. I didn’t dislike the 5th Scream installment, but I recall finding it to feel a bit like a rehashing of material that was previously done much better. With Scream 6, though I don’t think it really holds a candle to the original or Scream 2, I feel like 6 entered uncharted territory by bringing Ghostface out of suburban homes and into the city. The new landscape provided a fresh take on the familiar killer and brought a whole new set of obstacles for the main heroes.

Not that it’s of any surprise, but Jenna Ortega delivered another great performance as this new generation’s up and coming scream queen. Melissa Barrera also brought an equally great screen presence as Ortega’s sister. The two create a powerful dynamic and are excellent leads to this current era of Scream. 

Scream VI certainly isn’t without its flaws, as I found it to be a bit overly predictable and some of the movie reference monologues to be slightly overdone, but all in all, I had a good time. This Scream also seemed to up the ante when it came to brutality of its gore factor, which also set it slightly apart from some of its predecessors.

When Scream 5 came out, I wasn’t overly excited about the prospect of the franchise being rebooted, but now my opinions have changed. Scream 6 has definitely made me more excited for what’s to come.

Rating: 3.75/5

Though definitely not perfect, What Lies Beneath is a pretty well crafted horror/thriller,

I’m someone who tends to rewatch a movie I like many times over, but my most recent visit of What Lies Beneath was perhaps only my third or fourth time seeing it, which may sound like a lot, but for me it's definitely not. I remember first watching it at a sleepover when I was a teenager, and then not giving it another viewing for quite some time after. I feel like my memory was that of being somewhat disappointed by it, but my most recent rewatch proved that mostly wrong. 

The aspects that What Lies Beneath excels at are its lead performance by Michelle Pfeiffer and the build of tension and horror it creates within the plot and its imagery. Throughout the movie, you as the viewer, have to discern if Michelle Pfeiffer’s character is truly seeing a ghost, or if she’s going mad. Pfeiffer finds that balance to where she’s not overselling either potential outcome, where you could believe both scenarios; her insanity or the spiritual presence. Her excellent performance is blended incredibly well with the movie’s ability to not tip its hand too soon. Little clues and elements of foreshadowing are peppered throughout, but it never makes itself too easy to figure out before the movie’s final moments. 

What I don’t love about What Lies Beneath, and this was true way back when I first saw it, is I feel the end runs a bit too long. I know that in any movie, once it reaches its peak moment and all the answers begin to unfold, that you don’t want it to happen so fast that there feels an absence of closure, but I think What Lies Beneath goes too far in the other direction. Once all is revealed, it just feels dragged out more than necessary, until the end finally comes. It’s not even that there are too many scenes, just that the scenes themselves feel too long. A slow build for tension is definitely required for some of those moments, but even shaving a minute or two off some scenes would’ve been sufficient. 

Even with my opinions on the conclusion for What Lies Beneath, I still think it’s a good movie. I’d seen it before and parts still seemed creepy or unsettling to me this time around, which for me, is always the sign of a well made horror movie.

Rating: 4.5/5

Jordan Peele has proven he’s one of the most creative and talented directors working right now, and NOPE absolutely continues that trend.

NOPE has been one of my most highly awaited films of the year. The only thing that dropped my excitement for it the slightest bit was a trailer that I worried revealed too much of the plot. Thinking a movie has been spoiled for you inevitably dampens some of the anticipation, but as the movie progressed I realized very quickly how little of the film had been given away and zero enjoyment was lost. NOPE isn’t my favorite outing of Peele’s, but it’s still leaps and bounds ahead of what most people are doing in any of the genres this movie touches on. Peele is an expert at defying convention, taking his stories into whatever direction he feels and not staying within any box a certain type of movie is “supposed” to be in. NOPE is primarily a sci-fi/horror, but it could also be classified as a comedy and even a western at times. Making it quite unlike any movie I’ve ever seen.

The cast for NOPE are firing on all cylinders, but for me Keke Palmer was the absolute standout. She kills any scene where humor is at the forefront, but is also able to effortlessly flip the switch into the more dramatic or horror based moments. Since Jordan Peele has cast Daniel Kaluuya twice, I hope he follows suit with Keke Palmer, because I’d love to see her in another one of his movies. Speaking of Kaluuya, he was also excellent in NOPE. Together, he and Keke Palmer truly sold the believability of their sibling relationship which helped hammer in heart to the story.

NOPE is a movie where my positive opinion on it has grown more and more upon reflection. When I saw it at the theaters, I really enjoyed it, but the more I’ve thought about it since, I’ve realized just how excellent it was. There were a few scenes in particular that really stuck out to me and my appreciation for those have gotten stronger as well. There are times where a B or C plot happen that seem as if they don’t really fit in, but perhaps they’re there to merely divert the audience for a moment, allowing for them to be as unsuspecting as possible for what’s to come. At the time of seeing the movie, I couldn’t quite figure out why those side journeys were included in the film, but as stated, upon further reflection, they seemed not only to fit in entirely with the tone of the movie, but also helped to create a sense of tension and anxiety making for the film’s final moments to hit even harder.

I very much wish I lived closer to an IMAX theater, because I’d love to see this how Jordan Peele intended for it to be seen, but alas, that’s unfortunately not the case. But, even seeing it on a smaller, less impressive screen, I was able to be totally immersed by Peele’s story and filmmaking.

Rating: 3.5/5

The Black Phone is a better than average horror movie, one that definitely exceeded my initial expectations. 

Back in January, I remember seeing a trailer for The Black Phone; it played before some random YouTube video I was watching and I didn’t pay very close attention to it. January is infamous for its bad movie releases, so I didn’t think much of it at the time. But then, flash forward a bit and my initial assumptions were proven very wrong. I had wondered why the movie had taken so long to be released since the trailer came out at the beginning of the year, but upon further research I discovered they pushed the release to summer due to its positive screening responses. I now fully understand why. 

The Black Phone is relatively simple in concept; a young boy becomes the newest victim in a string of kidnappings being conducted by a serial killer dubbed “The Grabber”. While being held captive, he receives ghostly aid from the previous victims through a black phone that is somehow tethered to the afterlife. Because of this premise, both the cast and number of settings are very sparse, but that creates for a more intimate and frightening experience. The Black Phone definitely gave me a few jump scares, but it thrives even more on the atmosphere and imagery it presents. Many times, you see the grabber, standing in the shadows with just his silhouette being visible, outlining the shape of his imposing frame and the horned mask he wears. Those moments are easily the most haunting throughout the entire film. 

Though we never really see his full face, Ethan Hawke delivers a great performance as “The Grabber”. Since his face is never really in view, his character is strongly reliant on body language, and he finds exactly what to do to make himself as frightening as possible. Mason Thames, who plays the lead character Finney, also gives an excellent performance. He is the heart of the film, and he makes every single emotion entirely believable. It’s an incredibly heavy role for such a young actor, but Thames absolutely knocks it out of the park. 

For as good as I thought The Black Phone was, there were a few things here and there that didn’t completely win me over. Sometimes the other child actors didn’t seem quite as convincing as the rest, or the dialogue seemed a little clunky, but the majority of the movie was definitely strong enough to make up for it. In particular, any scenes where Finney was seeking help from the past victims. Those were easily the most impactful and creatively done moments of the movie. 

Overall, I’d say I was impressed by The Black Phone. It didn’t completely blow me away, but it was a good time at the movies, and that’s all you can really ask for.

Rating: 3.25/5

As I suspected, not as good as some of its predecessors, but the new Scream was still better than I anticipated. 

Scream is one of the rare horror franchises whose sequels aren’t all terrible. The third installment isn’t great, but still better than many other movies of the same genre. When I heard they were making a 5th Scream, I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t skeptical. With the passing of Wes Craven, I wasn’t sure another movie of the beloved franchise would be even worth watching with a different director at the helm. But, when I saw that the original cast was coming back, I knew I needed to give it a shot. Overall, I felt the new movie was decent, but nothing entirely special. 

For starters, I’ll talk about what I liked in this Scream. As expected, the classic cast members were great, far surpassing any of the performances given by the new teen additions. Even though many years have passed between this movie and the one that came before it, you’d never know by the performances given by Courtney Cox, Neve Campbell and David Arquette. The three of them slipped right back into their old roles with ease. For the plot, I will say for the most part, it kept me engaged, though I feel like this particular Scream makes it’s Ghostface a bit too easy to unmask before the final reveal. 

Taking the reins of a horror franchise created by such a legend has to be an incredibly daunting task. I would imagine one’s primary focus would be to appease the longtime fans. In that respect, I feel the creators behind Scream perhaps tried a little too hard to add in all the meta references that made Craven’s Scream movies so great. Really, it was more the constant horror movie name dropping that I felt was a bit excessive. I definitely think there should be some of that for sure, but maybe a little less than what we were given. 

I went into Scream with my bar set somewhat low, so I will say I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed it. That being said, I do hope this is the last installment to the franchise. I find it hard to imagine the original cast will want to keep coming back, and without them, the movies just wouldn’t be worth watching.

Rating: 5/5

Eerie, suspenseful, and essentially flawless. The Others is a shining example of how to tell a pitch perfect ghost story. 

The Others is a movie where every time I decide to watch it, I wish I could wipe my memory of ever seeing it before. The way the plot masterfully unfolds from beginning to end is one of the most brilliantly executed ghost stories I’ve ever experienced. Thinking back on when I first watched The Others, I believe I already had a notion of how it all ended, and I’m truly sad for myself that I wasn’t able to experience this as unaware as many other viewers were. I don’t think I intentionally spoiled it for myself, but I was too young to watch The Others upon initial release, so by the time I did see it, the cat was somewhat out of the bag. Even so, knowing about the plot beforehand never stops me from loving this movie.

The sign of an excellent plot twist is that after finding out, you actually want to start the story all over again once it ends. This is exactly what The Others does. It almost makes every rewatch of it a brand new experience, because you notice clues and signs you never had caught before. I’ve seen The Others quite a few times, but I’m still discovering new elements to its brilliance that I had missed in my previous viewings. Everything is flawlessly executed, a movie truly to be studied for the art of an impeccable story.

I wouldn’t say I’ve seen lots of Nicole Kidman movies, but I’ve seen quite a few, and I always go back to thinking this is her best performance. The array of raw emotions and experiences her character goes through are staggering, and that’s not just within the whole movie. There are scenes in which her character goes from unbridled anger, to fear, to extreme remorse all within seconds of one another. For less skilled performers, such scenes could cause emotional whiplash for the viewer, but she transitions each expression seamlessly across her character’s face. It’s really a gross oversight from the Academy that her work wasn’t recognized. I know Moulin Rouge was the same year and that horror is rarely rewarded, but this performance certainly should’ve been.

I feel as if I don’t watch The Others enough. It’s not as if I forget about it, but I think sometimes it slips my mind just how incredible it is. It’s a staple for the Halloween season, but really should be watched all year round. It’s just that good.

Part One: 2.5/5

Part Two: 3/5

Part Three 3.5/5

I waited to watch all three Fear Street movies before writing anything down about them, because I wanted to see how the trilogy panned out. Between all three movies, they're definitely not equal in quality, but overall, a fairly decent horror series. Since each film is a continuation of the one before it, I figured it would make sense to lump all three reviews together in one place. 

Fear Street Part One: 1994

Considering this is the film that kicked off the trilogy and the one with the decade closest to my generation, it's surprising to me that I found it to be the weakest of the three. Part One certainly isn't the worst horror movie I've seen, and I thought the opening sequence was great, but the rest of the plot for Part One seemed to decline in quality after that. To be fair, it wasn't until this movie ended that I realized all three movies were part of the same story, so not knowing that did initially tarnish my opinion on the movie even more. But once I found out they were connected, my thoughts on Part One became slightly more favorable.

Part One is a good catalyst to get the series going, and it does lead to better movies. It's great for all the exposition and knowledge you need for the trilogy going forward, but that's about all it's good for. To be honest, based on the reviews I'd heard about it before watching, I was a tad disappointed.

Fear Street Part Two: 1978

After watching Part One, I wasn't sure if I wanted to continue with the trilogy, but curiosity got the better of me and I decided to give the second one a chance. I didn't love it, but it was definitely better than the one that came before it. Part Two was a campy call back to old school slasher movies. This one seemed to be more aware of the type of film it was supposed to be and better used its time.

Part Two is not my favorite of the three, but its place in the trilogy timeline is exactly where I'd put it in a ranking; right smack dab in the middle.

Fear Street Part Three: 1666

Part Three is the one I'd assumed I'd like the least, but ended up being my favorite. It's definitely pulling from movies like The VVitch, but providing a much more watered down and viewer friendly version of it, which I personally don't take as a negative. It was interesting to see the actors from the previous two films become Puritan versions of their characters. It obviously made sense for the plot that it be cast that way, but it was also a great way to make each movie in the trilogy feel tied together. Even though it's the same actors, their performances all seem better in Part Three as well.

The way the Fear Street movies are designed, it would be hard to go back and watch just one, but if I do ever watch these again, I think I may only revisit Part Three. Given that I'd know what came before it, I honestly wouldn't mind bypassing the first two parts just to watch the final installment again.

Overall opinion on the trilogy? I thought it was fine. I was expecting better, but I wasn't completely let down. It was definitely something interesting to do, have three movies interconnected like this, and it certainly made me more compelled to finish out the story. There are definitely people out there who will enjoy these more than I did, but I wouldn't say it felt like time wasted giving them a chance.

Rating: 4.25/5

Ah, The Sixth Sense. Remember the days when a movie by M. Night Shyamalan wasn’t a punch line or didn’t cause collective eye rolling? 

When you look at the recent movies done by Shyamalan, it’s kind of shocking to remember that he was the mastermind behind such a prolific film. Not to say The Sixth Sense is perfect, but its probably one of the most well known movies of the past few decades. Whether by “I see dead people” or its plot twist, its reputation hasn’t faded over time. Watching it again, you can certainly see some of Shyamalan’s narrative quirks, but they’re subtle enough not to take over the whole plot and damage the quality of the movie.

Haley Joel Osment delivers one of those performances where viewers find themselves baffled as to how such a young person can bring so much emotion and realism to their character. I heard on a Podcast once how it frustrates them when just because an actor is a child, they’re not nominated in the Lead categories at the Oscars, and this a perfect example of that. Of course, Bruce Willis is the big name star of the movie, but it’s Osment’s performance that people have still been talking about over two decades later. Without him, the movie wouldn’t be nearly as good nor do I think it would’ve had such a lasting impact. 

The Sixth Sense is from an era before Shyamalan’s downfall. It did cement his reputation as being a director whose movies always had to have a twist, but it’s because this one was done so well. Even if parts of The Sixth Sense feel like Shyamalan was eager to try every technique he learned about in film school, the movie still holds up. It’s too bad the rest of his career couldn’t. 

I usually revisit The Sixth Sense once every couple of years or so. I wouldn’t say it gets better every time I watch it, but it certainly doesn’t get worse. Plus, Toni Collette’s performance, as little screen time as she gets, is worth rewatching time and time again.

Rating: 5+/5

I’ve previously written a review for A Quiet Place, in fact, I believe it was the second review I ever wrote, but upon my most recent rewatch, I felt compelled to write about it again. 

A Quiet Place is a perfect movie. Since it’s release, I’ve seen it more times than I know, but I constantly feel the need to watch it again. It is one of my most vivid theater memories I have. It was a matinee showing, and yet even though it was half empty, the atmosphere inside the theater was electric. At first, people were opening their snacks and eating their popcorn, as one usually does, but less than ten minutes in, that all stopped. Everyone went silent. Someone’s change spilled to the theater floor and we all seemingly about jumped out of our skins. After the end credits rolled, I left the theater in awe of what I’d just watched. 

When I revisit A Quiet Place now, I still feel the same sensations I did that day in the theater. I am captivated by the performances, its many brilliant scenes, and its use of the muffled perspective of Millicent Simmond's hearing impaired character combined with the over bearing sounds of nature, to create a completely immersive movie experience.

Minor spoiler ahead for those haven’t seen it, (which, what are you doing if you haven’t?), but the sequence where Emily Blunt’s character goes into labor is in my opinion, one of the best directed scenes I know. In all of the runtime prior to this moment, we see Blunt as a mother who finds herself being pregnant in a muted world where the slightest sound could mean a horrific death. As her due date gets closer and closer, the anticipation of a silent delivery gets more and more intense for the audience. Then, the moment we've all feared happens, and the way the three diverted subplots have to converge to create this one cohesive and incredibly intense sequence, is astounding to me. It’s a scene of absolute masterful filmmaking. 

A Quiet Place is a movie I’m constantly telling people to watch, even those who say they don’t like horror, because it’s so much more than that. It’s a story about family and what people will do to protect it, how to stay strong and together during times of immense grief and struggle, and paints a picture of a family trying to find a sense of normalcy for their children and for themselves.

I know that any movie remotely connected to the horror genre always struggles at the Oscars, but A Quiet Place is one I feel should have been able to break through that barrier. It’s impeccable.

Rating: 3.85/5

There are certainly horror movies out there that aren't as good as Candyman, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a little disappointed by this highly anticipated release. 

Back before the pandemic began, or maybe it was at the start (who knows at this point), I saw a preview for Candyman for the first time. The trailer intrigued me so much, that this movie shot very close to the top of my "Can't Wait to See" list. So, when it was finally released, I was incredibly eager to see if it lived up to the greatness of its trailer. I'm sad to say that for me it somewhat failed to meet my expectations, but I didn't leave the movie completely unhappy. 

Though Candyman looks great, especially the folklore sequences, a lot of it felt like it had been done before. There were similarities to scenes from 2020s The Invisible Man, and I'd argue that Invisible Man did it better. This isn't to say that Candyman's moments of horror weren't effective, they just didn't strike me as quite as frightening as I had expected. Honestly, I was more nauseated than scared, which was quite a surprise. 

I have seen the original Candyman, but it was a very long time ago, so I can't quite remember if that one had as much gore as this, but I can say with 100% certainty that if the 2021 Candyman's goal was to make the stomach's of the audience turn, that it absolutely succeeded. It's one of those movies where just shutting your eyes isn't enough to block out what's happening on the screen. The sounds are still there and they're just as grotesque. 

Even though Candyman may not have scared me in the way I expected, I still packed an unsettling punch. There were scenes that did linger in my mind after leaving the theater. The acting is top notch, without question the best aspect of the movie, especially from that of Yahya Abdul-Mateen II. Also, on a more noteworthy point, the social commentary that envelops its plot is critically important. Candyman is a movie with a message to send and it delivers without fail.

Rating: 2.5/5

Remember when the vast majority of people thought The Happening was the most bizarrely acted and baffling thing M. Night Shyamalan had done? Well; enter Old. 

I just recently left the theaters after seeing Old. I guess I'm not 100% sure of what I thought I was going to see. I had all but given up hope for Shyamalan after The Happening, but was pleasantly surprised by The Visit and Split, so I perhaps hoped that maybe this one would be somewhat on the same level as those. Suffice it to say, that didn't happen. 

I haven't seen all of M. Night Shyamalan's movies, but I've seen a fair few, and of all that I've seen, this one reminds the most of The Happening when it comes to tone, though I will say with absolute certainty that this is far better than The Happening. Like the aforementioned film, Old has jarring shifts in tone, dialogue that no one would say in real life, and performances unlike anything you'd see the actors do in a movie directed by anyone else. It makes you laugh when you maybe aren't supposed to, and also question your own judgement for taking the leap of faith to pay to see it in the theaters. It also makes you question whether or not Shyamalan has ever met a real child and knows how they act or speak. 

The thing is with Old, I can't tell for sure if we're supposed to take it seriously or not. My gut tells me no, but I'm not positive. The premise itself is rather surreal, but the acting and dialogue is off the charts bananas. It's like Shyamalan saw the actors delivering their lines like normal humans, but then gave them critiques and notes until they sounded the way he wanted. Then, once the characters came off as aliens interpreting the way the human race sounds and behaves, Shyamalan thought to himself, "Aha! Perfect!" It seemed so much this way, that I actually for a moment wondered if that was going to be the big Shyamalanian twist, but alas, it was not. If the movie was meant to be insanely goofy, then bravo, a job incredibly well done. If it wasn't, then it's a bit of a fail.

What's even more weird about Old than the movie itself is, like the ages of the characters in the story, my thoughts on the movie are rapidly changing. When I left the theater, I was of the mindset that I did not like it at all. I was even planning on giving it half a star. Less than two hours have passed, and I've already started shifting my thoughts to liking the movie a bit more. One reason for that is there is a scene in Old that I think does provide a proper visual scare, but it's primarily because I'm starting to think this will be a fun movie to revisit time and again. I still think Old is absolutely bonkers, but in more of a favorable way than I previously did.

Rating: 3/5

Not bad, but definitely disappointing. 

The first Conjuring movie thrived on the ability to bring intense scares without resorting to obsessive gore or jump tactics. It did have both of those elements of course, but there was a definite sophistication to it where they were used sparingly, thus creating a much more tense and frightening atmosphere. The Devil Made Me Do It went for the bigger is better concept, but proved that that's definitely not always the case.

The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It loses almost all of what made the first, and even some of the second film, so good. Sadly, this movie is was filled with cheap attempts at making its viewers scared by filling its runtime with excessive demon voices, basic jump scares, and typical possession movie tropes. I had always felt the second Conjuring movie amped up its scare tactics a bit too much, but The Devil Made Me Do It takes that concept far beyond what’s needed. 

Yet, with all that being said, it’s still better than your usual horror movie that’s centered around this particular topic. The main reason for this? Vera Farmiga. Her on screen relationship with Patrick Wilson has always been the core of these films, but both actors are too good for what this plot gives them. The great thing about this third installment is how much screen time Farmiga gets and how she is able to be the primary hero, but it still doesn’t make The Devil Made Me Do It able to hold a candle to its two predecessors. 

I wish this was better, but sadly it wasn’t. I definitely didn’t hate it and there were some great scenes mixed in with the mediocre or predictable ones, like parts of the tunnel scene were quite interesting, but it’s hard to put this against the now horror classic of the first Conjuring movie and say the third in the series is as good or even on the same level. There are certainly worse horror movies out there, but there are definitely better.

Rating: 1/5

This was not good. I literally paused this movie to take a nap. Not the desired result the movie was going for I’d assume.

Other than the titular Nun, the attempts to tie this into the rest of ever growing Conjuring Universe was a good effort, but ultimately one that failed. Honestly, if they were so intent on having this be a continuation of The Conjuring movies, given how much Taissa and Vera Farmiga look alike, it would've made more sense to have Taissa's character somehow being a relative of Lorraine Warren. But instead, we got a connection that felt very forced and like an afterthought. 

Final statement? They must have spent a very large portion of their budget on flying effect harnesses.

Rating: 4.85/5

Though not quite as good as the first, A Quiet Place Part II is a stellar sequel.

14 months. That's how long it had been since I stepped foot in a theater. When the pandemic hit and the world shut down, going to the movies and seeing a story on the big screen was one of the things I yearned for most. When I saw the most recent trailer for A Quiet Place Part II, and at the end it announced in big, bold letters "Only in Theaters", my already massive amounts of excitement for this movie grew more than I thought able. Thankfully, this sequel did not disappoint.

Similar to when I saw the first in theaters, after about five minutes into this nail biting ride, the theater fell silent. It's amazing how easy it is for a theater full of people, well, as full as Covid precaution seating will allow, to all fall simultaneously under the same spell. Though it is a work of fiction, you can't help but feel as if you too will be in danger if you make a sound. It's a remarkable result that would have been so easily lost had I only been able to see this at home. Like John Krasinski has said numerous times while promoting this film, A Quiet Place Part II is a movie that demands to be seen in a theater; where the viewer can collectively experience the same emotions, intensity, and plot with everyone else in the audience. I had forgotten what a wonderful feeling it was to sit in a theater and hear everyone gasp at the same moments, and feel like you're all witnessing something phenomenal together.

What makes A Quiet Place Part II such a fantastic follow up to its predecessor, is that nothing it does feels stale. It's able to breathe new life into its saga, and leave you wishing for more, even though you just spent the last hour and a half on the edge of your seat with your heart feeling as if it will pound out of your chest. That would honestly be the only complaint that I had for it, that I felt it could have been longer. I was quite surprised when the credits rolled, because I felt there definitely could have been more to the story.

The final praise I'll comment on for this film is Emily Blunt. She is outstanding in this. It's well known that the Oscars don't usually look towards movies of the horror genre for their nominees, Jodie Foster being a rare exception, but I've always felt that the first Quiet Place deserved more attention in that regard, though I was anything but shocked when it didn't. Sadly, I'd say the likelihood of Blunt getting Academy recognition for this sequel is even less likely than her chances for the first, but it is certainly a performance worth noting. Her character faces unbearable challenges, yet she does so with unyielding strength. Emily Blunt is a treasure to cinema. Her time for an Oscar is long overdue, and I can only hope that the Academy will wisen up sooner rather than later and give her performances the recognition they demand.

I cannot express in words how elated I was to be back in a movie theater again. As silly as it sounds, I was honestly almost brought to tears while watching this. Between the score cascading over the scenes and my joy of seeing it on a big screen, my emotions almost overcame me. I really think any movie that was the first theater experience after such a long time away would have been fantastic occasion, but that fist feature being A Quiet Place Part II made the moment all the more special.

Rating: 4/5

Though predictable at times, Run is an all around decent thriller with great performances. 

Chloe Sherman (Kiera Allen) has been wheelchair bound all her life, though she doesn't let that get in her way. She has a myriad of other ailments that prevent her from going to public school, so she's been homeschooled and cared for by her mother, Diane (Sarah Paulson). With graduation age approaching, Chloe has been eagerly awaiting the day when she can set out on her own and try her hand at college, but when her admissions letters seem to never arrive, Chloe begins to grow slightly suspicious of her mother. Quickly, Chloe begins to uncover that perhaps her overprotective, but loving mother may not be telling her the whole truth. 

Months and months ago, when I saw the trailer for Run the first time, I wasn't, at first, overly excited about it. I thought it looked like just another typical thriller, but was intrigued by the premise of Sarah Paulson being in it. Then, as the release got closer, and I saw more about it, the plot and small clips started to pique my interest. Now that I've seen it, I can say that it isn't a brand new type of thriller, as it very much follows a similar vein to stories like Misery and Whatever Happened to Baby Jane, but it is certainly one of the better films of its genre that I've seen in awhile. While the plot may not be groundbreaking, the performances are solid and it's an entertaining film from start to finish. 

I've been a fan of Sarah Paulson for many years now, so even if I'm not overly fascinated by the subject matter of what she's in, I'll watch it, just because I know that even if the movie or show is bad, that she'll at least make it worth worth a viewing. Thankfully for Run, the movie itself wasn't poor at all, but she certainly enhanced it. In terms of screen time, her role is actually more of a supporting one in some ways compared to Kiera Allen's Chloe, but in every scene Paulson is in, she fully pulls the viewer into her character with the believability of her acting. Kiera Allen's performance was highly impressive all on its own, but if you factor in that this was her first film appearance, it just makes her portrayal of Chloe even more fantastic. Her role is not only challenging emotionally, but physically as well. There's a scene in particular where Chloe is in her wheelchair, and having to race through a street and into a store, where it appears for a moment as if the chair will tip, but her impeccable control of the wheelchair keeps it upright. Allen, a wheelchair user in real life, adds a remarkable level of realism to the character that would have most certainly been lost had they cast an actor who didn't actually use a wheelchair off screen. Her performance in this film is what in a few years I would imagine will be looked back upon as her breakout role that shot her into fame.

Prior to Run, I had seen Aneesh Chaganty's film Searching, and that particular movie really impressed me. It had a very creative vision, and an ending that I honestly didn't see coming. I love to be surprised by a film's twist, but I also have a bad habit of trying to spoil it for myself by predicting the outcome. Sometimes, if the story's done well, that can be difficult, but other times it just feels too easy. Unfortunately for Run, I would place it in the latter category. I still very much enjoyed the movie as a whole, I just wish I hadn't been able to see the finale's twists and turns before they'd actually happened. 

2020 has been an incredibly bizarre and frustrating year for film, as many of the ones people having been dying to see have either been delayed or put onto streaming services. I for one am someone who adores the film experience, and have been desperately hoping that the in theater viewing experience that I've been craving, isn't gone for good. That being said, I feel like Run is a film that didn't really suffer from being pushed to a streaming service. Would I have liked to have seen it in a theater? Of course, but was seeing it on my humble at home screen a perfectly adequate viewing experience, absolutely. If you haven't watched Run yet and have Hulu at your disposal, take 90 minutes of your evening to give a viewing, I doubt you'd be disappointed.

Rating: 4/5

Though not nearly as impressive or frightening as the first, The Conjuring 2 is still a solid horror movie that brings plenty of scares. 

Paranormal investigators, Ed (Patrick Wilson) and Lorraine (Vera Farmiga) Warren have been called to London to investigate the potential haunting of a single mother and her four children. The Hodgson family have been experiencing the usual symptoms of a haunting, furniture and objects moving on their own, problems with electronics, but the most concerning is the changing in behavior of the youngest daughter Janet (Madison Wolfe). Janet begins to appear as though she's possessed by the spirit of the home's former owner, and she and her family desperately hope the Warrens will be able to rid their lives of the horror they've been experiencing. However, things aren't always as they seem, and with the presence of a demonic spirit plaguing Lorraine's mind, it's hard to know what to truly believe. 

The first Conjuring movie was one that blew me away with how great it was. I loved its ability to bring horror to the screen without being excessively violent, and how its atmosphere and tone were what made the film truly terrifying. The Conjuring 2 does have these qualities, but loses a lot of the subtlety that can be found in its predecessor. In the first, up until the end, there were hardly any majorly intense, loud or action filled scenes, most moments, even the most frightening, were very quiet, where just the sound of hands clapping could send chills down your spine. In the sequel, we are introduced to the Nun that has become a staple in the franchise, and don't get me wrong, there are certainly some terrifying moments involving this character, but whenever the pointed teeth are bared, it actually becomes less scary for me. In the sequence where Lorraine looks upon the painting of the Nun, questioning if her eyes are playing tricks on her, the scene's terror is amped up as the shadow of the Nun travels along the walls, making its way to the painting. Honestly, if the scene ended there, it would have been perfect, but then it adds more than what is needed, but that's just my opinion. 

What didn't change between the first and second Conjuring were the performances of its leads. Part of what makes these movies so fantastic are Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga's additions to them, especially Farmiga's. Even though the plots are about demonic possession and hauntings, their dedication to their characters make you believe it's all very real, which is a huge reason why the movies are so scary. Wilson's character is slightly more the one to take charge, whereas Farmiga's is the one who brings the calm and clairvoyance to their duo. With Lorraine being more in tune with the actual spirits that plague each family they try to help, her scenes are generally the more emotionally driven ones. Vera Farmiga is an actress I have admired for a long time, and one that I feel doesn't receive near the amount of credit she so rightly deserves, but it is in these films where you get many chances to see her shine. 

It's partially mentioned before, but for me, sometimes the smallest moments of horror can be the most frightening, and even though The Conjuring 2 goes a bit over the top at times, it certainly has plenty of those great scenes where something that once could have been seen as insignificant is now an object of fear. For example, many people wouldn't consider a child's firetruck toy to be something to be afraid of, but have it move on its own accord, and suddenly it makes your heart begin to beat faster. This scene in particular is a great example of how to use the concept of small horror impeccably well. When we see the tent at the end of the hall, we know it will be important later on, but just not exactly how. Then we see the firetruck and can assume it will likely appear out of the tent. You'd think being able to predict the horror would make it less frightening, but it doesn't. The starting and stopping of the siren on the toy and the way in which it enters the room, makes it very creepy, so much so that you find yourself almost annoyed at yourself for being so unnerved by such a minor thing.

With the third installment on its way, I can only hope that the next Conjuring movie can continue the story of the Warren's and do it the justice it deserves. Even if the second isn't as great as the first, The Conjuring movies could easily have become just another set of possession stories, ones that get put into the horror archives and forgotten, but the thanks to the direction and acting, they become films to be remembered. 

Rating: 4.25/5

Scream 2 continues its predecessors concept of poking fun at itself and perhaps does it even better. 

Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell), now in college, is still reeling from the events that happened in her home town when a string of vicious murders connected to the death of her mother happened in Woodsboro. She is trying to put the past behind her, but with the release of the new horror movie "Stab", based on those same events, the craze of the Woodsboro Murders is being resurfaced. Now, it appears there is a copycat that is killing college students on campus at Sidney's school. She, along with the survivors from the first go around, must once again band together to bring a stop to Ghostface. 

Film sequels are almost always a step down from the original, and even more so in the horror genre. It is exceedingly rare to say that the second in a franchise improves upon the first, but Scream 2 is one of those times where that statement can be made. A large portion of this movie talks about how bad sequels generally are and has an entire scene in a film class where they all discuss why sequels are usually so disappointing. This is part of why this particular follow-up is so fantastic. It knew it would be facing an uphill battle right out of the gate, so instead of ignoring the fact that this second installment into the Scream franchise might not be looked upon as highly and try to dodge any of the pitfalls most sequels get trapped in, it follows almost every expected cliche of follow-ups, and does it in an incredibly big and bold way. It's crazier, sillier, and definitely bloodier. 

What made the first Scream so iconic, was that it revitalized the slasher genre when it seemed as if it had almost exhausted itself. In the first movie, the opening scene is probably the most famous part of that film, so Scream 2 had a lot to live up to in that sense. Now personally, I don't love everything about this opening, because the crazed fans in the audience for "Stab" get on my nerves a bit, but I love the amount of energy it charges the movie with straight from the start. It shows the horror movie culture and the frustrations people have with the characters in the films, but just amps it up well beyond what it's actually like in real life. 

What I think Scream 2 does that is so fantastic, is the movie within a movie moments. The fake film "Stab" is referenced constantly throughout the plot, and there are even times where we get to see clips from it. There's one instance where we see the recreation of a scene from the first Scream, where Sidney is talking to Billy in the school hallway. The scene from "Stab" is mirrored shot for shot from Scream, and it even adds in a little joke from something Sidney says in the first movie. I'd seen Scream 2 a few times before seeing it again recently, and for some reason, the brilliance of this sequence had passed me by before, but I really appreciated it this time around. 

Before, when I used to talk about the Scream franchise to people, I would describe the second one as good, but just not as great as the first, but I don't think I would say the same thing now. This most recent viewing has really changed my tune on it. As I've grown older, my want to watch slasher films has diminished quite a bit, but I don't think I'll ever completely lose an interest in watching this series. 

Rating: 1.5/5

I really wanted to like Unsane; but oh boy, did that not happen. 

Sawyer Valentini (Claire Foy) has recently moved to a new city to escape a man named David Strine (Joshua Leonard) who had been relentlessly stalking her. Even though she's moved, she cannot shake the feeling that she is being watched. She voluntarily seeks counseling, and after admitting in the appointment she once had suicidal thoughts, she is committed into Highland Creek Behavioral Center against her will. While inside, she must undergo seven days of observation before being released and to her horror, she discovers that one of the orderlies is none other than David Strine, though he is going by the name of George Shaw. Now Sawyer not only has to figure out whether or not Shaw is in fact Strine, or if she's losing her mind, she also has to find a way to escape the institution. 

I came upon Unsane by chance. I saw a cameo in it mentioned in a video and then looked up the film to see what it was about. The premise intrigued me, as I am usually interested in most psychological thrillers, and I am also growing to be a fan of Claire Foy, so I was actually quite looking forward to watching it. I discovered right before I sat down to view it that the film was shot on an iPhone, and though I wasn't overly excited about that fact, it did add an extra element towards making me curious about the movie as a whole. Less than twenty minutes into it, I already regretted my decision to watch it. I actually almost considered stopping it in its tracks rather than waste the rest of my evening on it, but the completist in me wouldn't allow it, and I decided to see it through, with the hopes that it would get better. It didn't. 

After watching Unsane in it's entirety, I looked up some reviews about it to see what other people had to say, and their sentiments seemed to match mine. Most said they disliked the film, but praised Foy's performance in it. I mostly concur, though I wouldn't exactly say Foy's portrayal of Sawyer was anything to write home about. Don't get me wrong, she's a fantastic actress, but I just really did not like her character. I understood that Sawyer was going through a massive hardship and that the intention was for the audience to question the character's own sanity, but with her being the protagonist, it's usually custom for the viewer to want to care about the hero/heroine of the story, and I just couldn't. For an example of a film with a somewhat similar premise in that the main character is being tormented and slowly losing the trust of those around her, while still keeping the audience on her side, see Elizabeth Moss in The Invisible Man.

Yes, it is quite a unique idea to film an entire feature length movie on an iPhone, and kudos to Steven Soderbergh for being daring enough to try, but even that gimmick wasn't enough to cover up the performances in this film. Aside from Claire Foy and Jay Pharoah, everyone else seemed to either over or underplay their performances. Some were so bland that it didn't even appear as if they were trying to act, and others so broad that their scenes completely distracted from the actual plot. There's always a danger of things appearing too overblown when a film's premise takes place in a mental institution, meaning that there's a fine line between playing believable insanity and exaggerated attempts at looking crazy, and sadly, most of the performances in Unsane leaned towards the latter description. 

This may be one of my more scathing reviews, and I genuinely don't like writing overly negative remarks towards a film, because I know how much work goes into the process of making it, but I just couldn't bring myself to say too many great things about Unsane. Like I said before, I do admire the attempt to make a full feature on such a small piece of filmmaking technology, but that's about all this movie has going for it. 

Rating: 3/5

Though not my particular brand of horror, Midsommar is undeniably a visual masterpiece. 

After suffering a horrific tragedy, Dani ( Florence Pugh) decides to go to Sweden with her boyfriend Christian (Jack Reynor) for a trip he had planned with his friends to celebrate midsommar. Upon first arrival, Dani and her group are taken aback by the beauty of the village they've come to and the festival decorations that surround them. They are quick to notice some oddities in the artwork and behaviors of the people celebrating, but they chalk it up to tradition and brush it off. However, it doesn't take long for them to realize that maybe they should have been more worried about the festivities than they had originally thought.  

Midsommar is a film that I have been putting off watching since I first caught wind of it. Based on the trailer, I thought it looked beautifully shot, but also knew that it was going to fall into the category of horror films that I'm not exactly fond of. The genre where the horror is incredibly atmospheric and comes from making the viewer greatly disturbed and unsettled through imagery that is beyond what most people can fathom in their worst nightmares. This is a very tricky type of movie for me, because from a filmmaking standpoint, I really respect these films and can fully appreciate them for their skill and originality, but on a personal level, I've discovered I'm not really interested in putting myself through that type of grueling storytelling. 

So, if I knew beforehand that I wasn't going to really enjoy this film, then why did I watch it? For two reasons really, Florence Pugh, and sheer curiosity. Florence Pugh first came across my radar through Little Women, and then I also recently watched Fighting With My Family. Based on the buzz Midsommar received, I had been toying around with the idea of watching it, because I was really curious what all the fuss was about, but after watching Pugh in Fighting With My Family, it cemented my decision to finally give Midsommar a try. Even though I didn't think I was going to like this film, I had a feeling I was going to at least love Pugh's performance, and my hunch was correct. Pugh's character had scenes of violently intense emotion, and when watching those moments of trauma in the film, you had to imagine that Pugh must have been exhausted, both emotionally and physically, afterwards, because of how much she put into each second of her performance.  

Considering this film was directed by the same person who did Hereditary, I had expected Midsommar to have its fair share of highly disturbing moments, which it absolutely did, but I found it to be much more palatable than Hereditary. For one, I much preferred the look to this film, given the landscape and flood of sunlight throughout it, but it also doesn't get overly upsetting until it's second act, so there seemed to be more time to be able to just sit and watch rather than be incredibly anxious for the movie's entire runtime. Though, I will say that when the film's tone made a shift and it was clear something horrible was about to happen, the feeling my nerves created were akin to that of being in line for an intense theme park thrill ride, so in that sense, Midsommar definitely succeeded in its attempts to get under its viewer's skin.  

Midsommar is a film that I don't regret watching, but it's not something I think I'll ever feel the need to see again. I'm glad I watched it, mainly for the cinematography and performances, and any of the praise it received for those two things are rightly deserved. I'm sure many hardcore horror fans adore this film, and I can certainly see why, but the general concept of it is just not my cup of tea. 

Rating: 2/5

Unoriginal and heavily reliant on lack of lighting, The Wretched is a horror film that is easily forgotten. 

Due to his parents' divorce and the fact that he got in some pretty big trouble, Ben (John-Paul Howard) has been sent to his dad's coastal home to stay for the summer. He is less than pleased with the arrangement, and has seemingly vowed to make it as difficult on his father has he can. Upon arriving at his dad's house, he meets the next door neighbors; a happy family of four. Ben befriends the neighbor's son, a young boy named Dillon (Blane Crockarell). At first, things in town seem perfectly normal, but soon Dillon appears to be afraid of his mother while Ben begins to see bizarre and unexplainable figures once the sun goes down.

Where I live, we have a local drive-in theater, and this film was being showed first, then to be followed by Knives Out; I had only planned to stay for one movie. When the projection began, I quickly realized the employees made a mistake and began to show Knives Out first, but corrected their error ten minutes later and started The Wretched. Honestly, I wish they had just let Knives Out run, because it would have prevented me from sitting through The Wretched. That may sound harsh, but there just weren't many redeemable aspects to this movie. So much of it I had seen before, and the acting wasn't nearly good enough to make up for the lackluster story. 

Given that the action in the film was at times few and far between, The Wretched definitely tried to bring on the scares through sound and shadow, but the sounds they used were ones that I'd heard hundreds of times before. Whether it be the creaky bones that sound like snapping twigs as the victim becomes more and more possessed, the guttural noises coming from the monster, or the menacing and stripped down score, nothing about the film really seemed new or impressive to me. 

I am a fan of horror movies, but I'm also fairly picky when it comes to the ones I really enjoy. When I was younger and in high school, I would watch just about any scary flick that came my way, which I don't feel is super uncommon when it comes to teenage film tastes. Nowadays, I'm a bit more selective when it comes to horror. I'm not as drawn to slasher stories as I once was and I find myself, for better or worse, being more judgmental of the genre as a whole, which could be why I disliked The Wretched as much as I did. I have most certainly seen worse horror movies, and to the movie's credit, it did have some scenes that were a bit daring in what they showed on the screen and a plot twist that somewhat took me by surprise. 

Had this movie been released in a time when the world was not in the middle of a pandemic and there were more offerings to see at the theater, I likely would not have gone to see The Wretched. I saw a new movie playing at the drive-in and jumped at the chance to reclaim that movie theater experience, but was disappointed with the result. I'm sure this movie will please teen horror viewers, but for me, it was just mediocre. 

Rating: 3.5/5

A film that started out much better than it ended, Summer of 84 is for the most part, a fun nostalgia trip. 

In the year 1984 in a small town called Cape May, teenage boys are mysteriously disappearing. Soon it is believed to be the work of a serial killer called the Cape May Slayer. Davey (Graham Verchere) believes his next door neighbor, Mr.Mackey (Rich Sommer) is the murderer, and he enlists the help of his three best friends to start an investigation and find the proof that will put an end to the murders. 

Summer of 84 is clearly riding off the success of Stranger Things, and hoping to tap into that fanbase. The music, characters, and many parts of the plot almost feel as if they are pulled straight from Hawkins. That being said, it does deviate from the popular series by making its story more rooted in reality rather than science fiction. 84 definitely did a good job at honing in on that '80s sentimentality that many viewers are drawn to, and for that reason, any fan of those types of films would most likely enjoy the bulk of this movie. Fans of the Hardy Boys or Nancy Drew may also find some interest in this film, but perhaps not for the entire runtime, as it does get quite a bit grittier than a mystery one might find between the pages of either of those series. 

Summer of 84 wasn't exactly a unique concept, as there are many other stories that have not only tackled the decade but the plot as well. That being said, it still manages to take the common elements found in likeminded movies, such as bike riding through town, one friend in the group being more foul mouthed than the others, and general summer antics, and make them entertaining and slightly new. I really liked how the film began with the idea of the kids playing manhunter, and how that became a theme for the rest of the movie. That alone made Summer of 84 ever so slightly stand apart from of the rest of its nostalgia packed cohorts. Not to say it made it better than those other films, but made it so it didn't blend in so much. 

The main problem I had with Summer of 84 was that it didn't really seem to be sure what type of movie it wanted to be. It felt stuck between the juvenile humor and mystery of Stranger Things and the more profane and graphic elements of IT. For the majority of the film's runtime, it is fairly mundane, but then there are parts where it does a complete 180 and suddenly has gone from teen movie to slasher film. For that reason, I found it to be quite unbalanced with a not very satisfying conclusion. Had the movie quit while it was ahead, I would definitely have given it a higher rating, because there are certainly parts of it that are a lot of fun to watch. 

Though I would say I was somewhat disappointed by Summer of 84, I wouldn't go as far as to say it was a bad movie. Had I seen this when I was in middle or high school, I probably would have absolutely loved it, but as an adult, it just didn't win me over as much as I thought it would. Definitely worth a one time watch, but doesn't exactly merit numerous viewings. 

Rating: 4.95/5

A film whose greatness took me by surprise, The Invisible Man is easily one of the better horror/thrillers I've seen in recent history. 

Cecilia (Elisabeth Moss) attempts to sneak out one night to escape her abusive husband Adrian (Oliver Jackson-Cohen), but is unable to leave without him noticing. She manages to get away, but not in the secretive way she had hoped. Her only option is to hide out in a friend's home and lay low until she can plan her next move. To Cecilia's great shock, two weeks after breaking free, she learns Adrian has committed suicide. 

At first, Cecilia is filled with relief, knowing that she doesn't ever have to again, worry about Adrian finding her. That reprieve from her fear is very short lived, as Cecelia begins to wonder if Adrian is actually gone. Inexplicable events keep happening to her, and with her husband being the scientific genius he was, there's no doubt in her mind he's figured out a way to stalk and continue tormenting her; but who will believe a woman who claims an invisible presence is following her every move?

Going into The Invisible Man, I didn't have low expectations, but I just didn't have overly high ones. I had only seen one trailer for the movie, and it definitely piqued my interest, but I still didn't know too much about the film. Once I saw the first set of reviews coming in for it, I was honestly surprised to see it receiving such high acclaim, but now that I have seen it, it is incredibly clear as to why. The Invisible Man, though technically a horror film, doesn't rely on gore and gimmicks to get its results. It does have the occasional jump scare to make it frightening, but what really makes it shine is the atmosphere it creates and its performances. Elisabeth Moss, as one would expect, is a phenomenal lead for this film. Though you as the viewer know what's going on, you can fully understand why the other characters in the film doubt her so much. Moss completely sinks into the crazed and terrified role in which she plays, and you can't help but be afraid both for her, and a little of her. 

A theme that I have been noticing when it comes to movie scores lately, is the heavy use of the cello, and I have to say I am absolutely all for it. Movies like Us, Joker, and The Invisible Man all seem to have very stripped down musical compositions backing the action on the screen. The use of the cello accents the intensity of the scene, and definitely adds extra anticipation and unease to it as well. In this film, I found myself feeling quite unnerved whenever the score would kick in, because I knew that something frightening was going to begin, and with this film, it was never guaranteed what that was going to be; whether it would be an attack on Cecilia, or something that would add to the gaslighting that had been happening to her. I really love this trend in movie music, and though I don't want to see it copied, I look forward to seeing what other films might take note of this and other like minded scores and take inspiration from it. 

There were many things to be impressed with for The Invisible Man, but what I think is the most notable would be its use of special effects. The way they made the presence of an invisible person seem so palpable, was truly remarkable. It seemed uncomfortably realistic. As I write this, one specific scene comes to mind, and it's when you get to see this effect in it's full glory. There's little I can say without spoiling the scene, but I feel like anyone would know it when they see it. I absolutely love how open the shot was, allowing for a full viewing of what was happening, and it made the invisibility effect an absolute home run. I can't think of many other times where I was quite as impressed with a film's effects as I was with this one, especially given the subtly in how The Invisible Man used it.  

I am honestly so glad that this film has been made available to be streamed so soon. I saw it in theaters before they all had to shut down, and I really cannot wait to watch it again. Sometimes, a horror movie or a thriller loses its luster upon a second viewing, but I doubt that will be the case for The Invisible Man. 

Rating: 4.25/5

A solid showing for a much anticipated sequel, Zombieland: Double Tap is great for laughs, gore, and a good time. 

The world has been turned into Zombieland for so long now, that the remaining uninfected have adapted their ways of survival, and have started to put the types of zombies into different categories. It is with this knowledge that Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), Wichita (Emma Stone), and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin) have managed to keep their odd, little makeshift family alive. 

As they make their travels across the barren remnants of the United States, they find themselves at the vacant Whitehouse. At first, they feel this could be their new home, especially in Columbus' eyes, but others aren't so content. Little Rock is yearning to find more people her own age, and Wichita is starting to feel the pressures of domestic life. Soon their familial bliss comes to an end when Little Rock runs away, and Tallahassee, Columbus, and Wichita have to venture out into the unknowns of Zombieland to find her. 

The first Zombieland is one of my more loved movies, so when I heard that the sequel was finally going to be made, I couldn't wait for it to be officially released. With that being said, I went into the theater with caution, making sure I didn't set my hopes too high, so I wouldn't be overly disappointed if the film ended up not being everything I wanted it to be. Thankfully, I found that I really enjoyed my time watching Double Tap. Could it be because I went in without expecting too much out of it? Perhaps; but it could also be because this sequel did a very good job at sticking to the formula that made the original so great, but adding in enough new material to make it not seem like a complete repeat of its predecessor. 

Easily my favorite part of Double Tap was one very creative sequence that occurred roughly half-way through the film. There is a fantastic set of tracking shots where the characters battle it out with members of the living dead, and the ingenuity, fluidity, and energy that comes from that scene is absolutely spectacular. What's so frustrating with scenes like this, is that I rarely catch on to the tracking shots until about a quarter of a way into them, so I continue to watch intently until the cinematic brilliance is over, but then long to go back and watch that section of the film again so I can fully appreciate it in its entirety. I know that this moment in the film isn't one continuous cut, but they do a very impressive job at taking the handful of extended shots and putting them together in a way that made it seem like it was one. 

When the first Zombieland came out, the majority of the cast members were fairly new to the film world. Of course Woody Harrelson was incredibly well known, but Emma Stone, Jesse Eisenberg and Abigail Breslin, not as much. When first seeing the trailer for Double Tap, I found it quite humorous to see a movie of this type have every lead cast member with the words "Academy Award Winner" or "Academy Award Nominee" as part of their name. Even though this movie is far from something that would be nominated for an Oscar, the cast gave it their all and because of that, made it  a wonderfully fun and entertaining comedy. 

Zombieland: Double Tap has definitely been receiving some mixed reviews, but I personally had a great time going to see it. My amusement by it could be partially connected to the somewhat stressful week I had had prior to seeing it, so watching some comical zombie fighting proved just the ticket to ease my mind. Even so, I think my enjoyment of Double Tap is primarily because it is a well made and humorous contribution to the ever growing zom-com genre.  

Rating: 4.5/5

Crimson Peak has its occasional flaws, but is more than worth the watch for the look alone. 

Edith Cushing (Mia Wasikowska) lost her mother at a young age and saw her ghost the night of the funeral. The experience has haunted her ever since, especially the words whispered by her spectral mother, "Beware of Crimson Peak."

Years later, Edith is living with her father and working for him as well. She dreams of becoming an author, but her local publishers show no interest in the ghost stories she's been writing. When a dignified and handsome aristocrat named Thomas Sharpe (Tom Hiddleston) arrives in her town, she is quickly fascinated by his charm and mystique. What appears at first to be a great romance quickly turns sinister for Edith, when she returns to Thomas' home; a crumbling mansion that sits atop a mountain composed of red clay, covered by a blanket of snow.   

As if there could have been any other outcome, the visuals for Crimson Peak delivers in spades. Whether or not people are fans of Guillermo del Toro's stories, there's no doubting the dedication and impeccable style that he brings to each and every one of his films. What is truly remarkable about Crimson Peak is how clear it is that the stunning and spectacular look of the movie is actually real and not CGI. When I noticed this, I found it impossible not to marvel at the meticulous work that went into every moment of the movie. The look and style of the corridor in which Edith finds herself so often along with the contrast between the stark white of the snow and the richness of the colors around it were what captivated my admiration the most. Crimson Peak is a film that is hard to turn your eyes away from, because you are so entranced by each striking visual the film has to behold. 

When it comes to making a period piece, the casting is one of the most crucial elements for turning the film from a mediocre attempt to a masterpiece. For Crimson Peak, I would say that overall, the choices for the actors were fairly well made. Tom Hiddleston easily slips into another time period with his elegance and manner, so there is no trouble in believing him to be from the late 1800s. I have seen Mia Wasikowska in more films based in the past than I have the present, so again, no fault to be found. At first, I was a little hesitant about Jessica Chastain, because she's very modern in my eyes, but I was pleasantly surprised with the chilling performance she gave as Thomas' unwelcoming sister. With this role, it was proven to me that she is able to tackle just about any role that is handed to her. 

Oddly enough, for a ghost story, the actual phantoms were my least favorite part of the movie. Don't get me wrong, there were times where the spirits were certainly frightening, but I have learned from this film and a few others, that I am apparently very hard to please when it comes to making convincing and eerie ghosts. I find that I am more afraid of what I can't fully see compared to something that is shown head on. When Edith has a decrepit hand reaching around her shoulder in her sleep, that is unnerving enough to me to make my skin crawl, but when she is actually being chased by the malevolent spirits, not so much. Perhaps my practical brain is taking over and suddenly I have a hard time believing it once I actually see it, or maybe my imagination can concoct a ghost more horrifying than a movie can ever produce. Either way, Crimson Peak's moments of terror are far more sophisticated and well thought out than your average horror movie, and for that it is to be applauded. 

Guillermo del Toro is a director whose work I have sadly not seen enough of, but my recent rewatch of Crimson Peak has solidified my thoughts that I definitely need to spend more time dedicated to seeing his films. It's rare to see a movie like Crimson Peak where you can practically forgive any blemishes it may have just because of its brilliant direction and design. For that it should be a must see for any fan of cinematography and film.   

Rating: 5/5

Shaun of the Dead is a fantastically funny movie that has a heart of gold hidden just beneath the gore. 

Shaun (Simon Pegg) goes through every day of his life following the same exact patterns. He goes to the same bar, works the same boring job, and gets the exact same snacks at the store. His roommate and best friend Ed (Nick Frost) is unemployed and spends his days lazing around on this couch, but doesn't seem to mind his lethargic lifestyle. 

Shaun and Ed's repetitive and mundane days get thrown a major curveball when they discover that a virus has swept the planet that turns the infected into zombies. Suddenly, their lives are all about survival and finding anyway possible to get back to their beloved pub so they can barricade themselves in until the world crisis is over. 

Of the collaborative films between Nick Frost, Simon Pegg, and director Edgar Wright, Shaun of the Dead is likely their most famous. This movie is the perfect blend of comedy and carnage. It has the ability to make you laugh out loud, but also make you cringe away from the screen ever so slightly, as you watch the zombies devour the various members of the human race. Shaun of the Dead possesses the type of humor that I enjoy most. It's able to be silly without crossing the line into being senseless, and it blends its comedy styles and doesn't focus on just either slapstick or joke based humor. In fact, this movie contains one of my favorite comedy scenes of all time, that being when they are fighting off the zombies in the pub to the music of Queen. Perfectly timed and unique, it makes for one hilarious scene. 

Edgar Wright's directing style is very distinct, in that almost every film, if not all of his that I have seen, use the same frantic editing style. When someone slides a drink across a bar, the camera rapidly zooms in and the sound the glass is making as it is moving gets heavily amplified. Now, I am not normally someone who likes it when directors or editors repeat their techniques from film to film, but for Edgar Wright, I find no annoyance with it. I look at it as the trademark for his fast paced action comedies, and he always seems to do it in the exact moment that would bring about the most humorous result. He is an expert when it comes to timing, and that is just one of the many reasons I have loved every movie of his that I have been fortunate enough to watch. 

Shaun of the Dead, though mainly a comedy/horror combination, differs from many other films that attempt to take on the genre, because it has the ability to pack an emotional punch. Yes, the majority of the time they are turning almost every undead attack into a moment for laughter, but there are also moments where it is clear that the characters are aware of how high the stakes are, and what they could lose if their plan were to fail. Even though their goal is highly dangerous and faulty, you are constantly rooting for each character to make it to the pub before the film's end. Whether it is because you don't want the friendship between Ed and Shaun to be severed by the teeth of a ravenous zombie, or you don't want to see Shaun lose his girlfriend or his mom, you are pulling for the characters and their relationships to succeed each step of the way. 

Though Shaun of the Dead was not the first movie to tackle a horror subject and turn it into a comedy, it has definitely become one of the most memorable. I am slightly more partial to the trio's movie Hot Fuzz, but that's mostly due to the fact that zombies tend to make my stomach turn. Shaun of the Dead is a wonderfully good time and is always one of my go to's for the Halloween season. 

Rating: 4/5

Though it lacks the some of the fright and charisma of its predecessor, It Chapter 2 is a solid film with impressive performances. 

27 years after the self-titled "Losers Club" rid Derry, Maine of the terrifying and murderous clown, Pennywise (Bill Skarsgard), the disappearances and deaths begin to once again surface in the small town. Mike Hanlon (Isaiah Mustafa) is the only members of the original club who's stayed in Derry, and once he begins to see the familiar and frightening patterns recurring, he knows he must contact his old friends to carry out the pact they made so many years ago. 

It Chapter Two was a slightly unusual scenario for me, being that I was watching a film based on a book that I hadn't read. Usually I do my very best to read the text beforehand, so I have something to compare it to. In this case I hadn't yet read the book, but I actually knew a fair amount about the actual novel anyways, and one of those things I knew was that the second half of the book is almost always discussed as being weaker than the first. Now, whether or not that is true to the book, I cannot say for sure, but I can attest to the fact that it is accurate to the films. It Chapter Two was in no means a bad movie, but it certainly paled in comparison to Chapter One. For me, though Bill Skarsgard's portrayal of Pennywise is as brilliant as ever, I didn't find this installment of the story to be nearly as frightening as the first. There are many reasons that could have contributed to this result, but for me I feel it is primarily due to the heavy use of special effects and the pacing of the film. 

In the first It, there were of course times where the use of computer created scares were necessary, but there was also a lot of practical effects, darkening of the atmosphere and tone of the scene, and reliance on Skarsgard's skill to enhance the fear in the film. However, Chapter Two strongly relied on the use of CGI to create the many forms of Pennywise, and I found myself rolling my eyes rather than jumping in my seat. The actual moments off screen, leading up to the supposed "scares", where you could only hear what was about to come rather than see it, were much more frightening than actually getting the visual of what was attacking the character at that given time. Speaking of which, to me it didn't seem like there was enough time between each horror packed moment. I have always felt that the key to a really great horror film, is to give the audience a good fright, but then let the plot briefly mellow out, so the viewer's heart rate can return back to normal, be lulled into complacency and then surprised by the next terrifying scene. Now, as previously mentioned, I have yet to read this book, so for all I know the movie was just following the chain of events laid out for them by the novel, and if that's the case, well done for sticking to the source material, but if it wasn't, then I do feel the rapid fire scares brought down the fear level of the overall film. 

I know I have said a lot of negative comments towards It Chapter Two and it may even seem like I didn't like the movie, but be assured that isn't the case. I think I may have gone into the movie with my expectations a little too high, and therefore my opinions on the film may come off a bit more pointed than anticipated. That being said, what really shines through in this movie are the performances by its cast, both young and older. Bill Hader, who plays the grown up version of Richie Tozier, is easily the stand out member of the adult Losers Club. He has proven before now that he can master both comedic and serious roles, and he brings that skill set to this film with full force. I believed every moment of his fear and anguish for the situations his character was presented, but I also found myself laughing out loud with his well timed and sarcastic sense of humor. All the other members of the adult cast were great, especially James McAvoy and Jessica Chastain, but Hader was without a doubt my favorite. 

Though there were definitely aspects to this movie that I didn't particularly love, I do have to 100% give it props for how fearless it was on what it dared to put on screen. It's one thing to tell a story of a clown who preys on children, but its a whole other ball game to actually have the guts to show it. Aside from the tenacity the film had, what really made me love it was its central location. Being born and raised in the Maine town Derry is based on probably makes this film more exciting to me than to the general viewer, but even so, It Chapter Two is a much better than average horror movie and a must watch for the fall season. 

Rating: 4.25/5

Ready or Not is quite the unique horror film that is quirky, gory, and a whole lot of fun. 

On the day of her wedding, Grace (Samara Weaving) is more than excited to be marrying the love of her life Alex (Mark O'Brien), but is apprehensive about the family she is going to wed into. Her soon to be husband comes from an incredibly wealthy, pretentious, and odd family dynasty, and they haven't been exactly subtle in their disapproval of their newest family member. 

Once the wedding is over, Grace and Alex return to the Le Domas family estate to prepare for their honeymoon. Their night of newlywed bliss is disrupted when Alex's Aunt Helene (Nicky Guadagni) appears in their room telling them they need to be downstairs by midnight to play a game. The playing of a game on the night of a wedding is tradition in the Le Domas family and is their own special way of initiation. Grace finds it odd, but agrees to play, having no idea she's about to get herself into a deadly game of Hide and Seek. 

For starters, I feel it is necessary to say that I am particularly picky when it comes to horror-comedy crossovers. I feel that sometimes they can be very distasteful, making a mockery of some pretty gruesome concepts. In the right hands, these types of films can be pure genius, and in the wrong ones, a total disaster. Overall, Ready or Not is able to remain a balanced film, not swaying too far into the direction of ridiculousness. The type of scenes the movie does for laughs is slightly reminiscent of the comedy found in Hot Fuzz. However, unlike Hot Fuzz, Ready or Not approaches the humor and horror in a more acute style, by making the stakes seem far more dire for the main protagonist; thus creating a movie that has the ability to cause more apprehension rather than just straight laughs. 

What I really loved about Ready or Not, was its unpredictability and use of music. It's clear from about twenty minutes in that nobody is safe in this savage game of Hide and Seek, and you really never know who will die, or in what absurd and outlandish way they will meet their demise. When it came to the film's climax, I really wasn't sure what the outcome was going to be, because the movie itself was so unusual. I love it when a film constantly keeps you guessing, especially in a movie like this, because it makes you feel like your invested in the plot, rather than just an observer watching the predictable chain of events unfold. As before mentioned, the music in Ready or Not was great. Not only does the movie come with a catchy and slightly unsettling theme song, but the score itself worked beautifully with the scenes as they progressed. Music in films is something I have always taken a strong notice to, and I personally found the instrumentals in Ready or Not to be slightly above par compared to your everyday horror movie. They most certainly added into the concept of making the Le Domas family appear as if they were stuck in a different era, as well as majorly increased the intensity of many of the scenes. 

The only true negative that I could say for Ready or Not, is I felt some of the scenes, and a big portion of the events leading to the climax, dragged on a bit too long. At times, it felt like a very bloody and haggard game of cat and mouse that seemed forced to continue until it ran out the clock. I completely understand the necessity of a creating a big build up to a film's major moment, but there may have been too much excessive chasing to make Ready or Not be a true home run. Yes, it is a game of Hide and Seek, but how long can someone attempt to hide before it becomes a tad overzealous?

Any negative comments said about the film aside, Ready or Not is a really entertaining and energy charged movie. It has definite rewatchability, even if the outcome of the game is already know to the viewer. Ready or Not beats to its own drum and is easily one of the best movies to come to the horror genre for 2019. 

Rating: 3.75/5

With monsters better than the content in between, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark is a well made horror movie that doesn't fail to entertain. 

In the year 1968, Stella (Zoe Margaret Colletti) and her friends are going trick-or-treating to celebrate Halloween. When a prank goes wrong, the group finds themselves having to hide out a haunted house that used to belong to the Bellows family. Legend has it that if a child goes in asking for Sarah Bellows to tell them a story, they die. 

Thinking it is just Halloween fun, Stella takes Sarah's storybook from the house, hoping to be able to explore it more at home. When Stella begins to look through the book, she is horrified to see a story beginning to write itself in blood red ink. The next day, a boy has gone missing. It doesn't take Stella long to realize the connection between the two mysterious events, and soon she and her friends are on a race against time and terror to stop Sarah Bellows from claiming more victims. 

Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark is a perfectly adequate horror movie that I really wish had existed when I was growing up. It faces a tricky balance at entertaining a wide range of audiences, given the books in which it is based off. The books themselves most certainly pushed the boundaries for what could be considered too scary for a young reader, and the film tries to push those limits as well and mostly succeeds. It is definitely too frightening to be considered a children's movie, but isn't too silly to be found irritating by an older audience. Given the fact that Guillermo del Toro wrote the screenplay, it couldn't have been easy for him to tone down his typical way of storytelling, so for that reason it did seem like the movie struggled at times to stick to its PG-13 rating. 

Easily the best part of Scary Stories were the creatures and ghouls that appeared periodically throughout the film. The dialogue and plot points in between each monster appearance was fairly mediocre, but that mediocrity was completely saved by how creepy each scary story scenario was. Most notably would for me would be "the Pale Lady". There's something effortlessly eerie about the slow moving villain. When the killer or monster doesn't feel the need to run to catch its victim, it appears to have more power than the sprinting and chasing antagonists do. The slow and relentless killers know they are going to get their prey and don't feel the need to hurry. The scene in which "the Pale Lady" is the story in focus, is not only the most frightening part for the movie, but is visually the best as well. The contrast between the intense bright light and the paleness of the hospital walls makes for a impressive movie moment. 

Performance and character wise, Scary Stories left something to be desired in most of the cast except for the main character, Stella. Her friends were all fairly static characters and fell into your basic horror movie character tropes; the smart sensitive guy, the immature dim witted friend, and the mysterious newcomer. Stella on the other hand, being the protagonist, had to go through many changes throughout the film and Zoe Margaret Colletti was definitely up for the task. There were many times where I felt her performance was actually better than some of the material she was given, and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if we see bigger things from her in the future. 

Overall, I really did enjoy Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark despite its occasional flaws. I do feel that its release was a bit premature given the topic of the movie and the fact that its mostly centered around Halloween. However, if you consider the fact that It: Chapter Two is about to drop into theaters very soon, it makes perfect sense that Scary Stories didn't want to compete with such a highly anticipated release.

Rating: 4.25/5

Does Crawl have the potential to do for Florida what Jaws did for the ocean? Probably not, but is it a good time anyways? Absolutely. 

College student and competitive swimmer Haley (Kaya Scodelario) is planning on staying away from her hometown in Florida, as there is a Category 5 hurricane beginning to take over. Her plans however, get a wrench thrown in them when her sister calls to ask if she's heard from their father. When Haley responds no, she starts to question his safety from the storm and makes the decision to head towards the storm to check on her dad before the weather gets too bad. 

As Haley gets to her town border, she sees the evacuation is already underway. The only way she can get to her father is to defy the police officers' orders and charge passed them so she can get to her family home. Once there, her dad is nowhere to be found, and she begins to worry something more ominous than a storm is lurking about. 

Crawl is a good ol' fashioned monster movie and I love it. The runtime for the film is quite short, being just under an hour and a half from beginning to end, but for this type of film that's a positive, not a negative. Had this movie been any longer, the numerous alligator attacks would likely have been overdrawn and gratuitous. I have seen films that do just that, and by the end of it you are more than ready for it to be over. The writers for Crawl were very smart in having the inevitable blood and gore last only as long as needed, and making sure the novelty the film was trying to sell, killer gators, didn't overstay its welcome. By doing so, everything in Crawl appears to happen in rapid succession, leaving very little down time to let your nerves or adrenaline begin to normalize. 

When I first watched Jaws many years ago, I remember that for me, the most frightening scenes weren't where you actually saw the shark, but when you were witnessing scenes from its point of view under the waves. The same can be said for the most fear inducing sequences in Crawl, though in a very different setting. Instead of underwater shots looking at aquatic plants and the legs of swimmers, you are seeing cars and gas pumps submerged by hurricane flooding. What might make this even more unsettling than a look beneath the ocean, is the lack of clarity to the water in Crawl. As a viewer in the audience, you struggle to see exactly what the gators and main characters are swimming through, but you know, as by what was previously stated in the film, that the scaly swamp predators have impeccable hearing when it comes to finding their prey beneath the surface. You can't help but feel your heart rate begin to increase as you strain your eyes to see what lies within the murky water.  

What so many movies like this struggle to do, is effortlessly weave in any backstory for the characters. Many times, the relationships presented are strained for one reason or another, meaning that there is almost a guarantee that at some point a heart-to-heart conversation of reconciliation is going to take place. Without that, it seems the filmmakers worry the audience won't be able to form any connection to the characters, and therefore they feel the need to bring an emotional background to them, no matter how forced it may appear. Crawl does have some remnants of this concept, but it doesn't feel quite as fabricated or artificial as other movies' attempts have been. I did find myself suppressing the occasional eye roll when any moment of sentimentality presented itself, but I definitely understand why Crawl felt the need to include them. In order to ensure their film would be many steps above a SyFy channel original movie, they needed to give their characters a certain amount of depth in order to add a level of realism to them. For the most part, this tactic succeeded, but it wasn't able to fully escape the trap of having the added emotion come off as being a bit out of place.  

When I first saw the trailer for Crawl, I can't say I was overly eager to see it, but I figured I'd give it a shot, expecting it to just be a silly but overall entertaining film. I was truly surprised by how much I enjoyed it, and not because I found it silly. It was exciting, genuinely jumpy at times, and an all around solid creature feature. 

Rating: 4.5/5

IT is a film that lived up to the hype that surrounded its initial release, and continues to hold up as an unsettling, yet oddly comical, horror movie. 

In the late 1980s, in the town of Derry, Maine, a young boy named Georgie (Jackson Robert Scott) goes missing after chasing a paper boat made for him by his brother Bill (Jaeden Lieberher). Months after his disappearance, Bill refuses to give up the search, and gets his close friends, Richie (Finn Wolfhard, Eddie (Jack Dylan Grazer), and Stanley (Wyatt Oleff) to help him look for his little brother. 

Unfortunately for the four boys, their quest becomes more desperate as numerous children in Derry begin to disappear. At first, it is just the vast number of missing kids that are troubling Bill and his friends, but when each one of them confesses to experiencing a horrifying event involving a clown named Pennywise (Bill Skarsgard), they are quick to realize that their fight to find Georgie is going to be more terrifying and treacherous than any of them could ever have imagined. 

When a movie is as talked about and as publicized as IT was, there's always the risk that it won't live up the high expectations it built for itself. Honestly, I can say going into it I had my doubts of how great it was going to be, given that so many of Stephen King's novels that had been put to film have had a tendency to get majorly lost in translation. Now, of course I am not speaking of all Stephen King movies, but a large number most certainly have failed to be as captivating and as frightening as their written source material was. Thankfully, IT was able to fully deliver everything its trailers promised the audience it was going to be and more. The film is less "make you jump out of your seat" scary, and more, "show you disturbing imagery that follows you into your nightmares" scary. The latter type of film can be a tough sell, as it can have the tendency to either go overboard, or come off as too silly. IT was able to tread the boundary between the two, making it a horror film that is rewatchable, and somehow enjoyable despite the distressing premise of the story. 

What this movie had going for it from the very beginning, was the uncanny magnetism a story about a group of bike riding, foul-mouthed, preteens always seems to have. Any film that has characters like that at its core, is almost guaranteed to have a leg up when it comes to entertaining an audience. Casting for these types of films must be immensely tricky, because the kids who play the roles can't solely rely on wit, humor, or charisma. Their characters experience a hefty amount of trauma and fear, and they have to be able to make those scenes feel believable, so the audience is frightened for them and fighting for their survival. Of the young cast members, the one who I felt excelled at this task the most was Sophia Lillis, who played Beverly Marsh. Her character's home life was almost more terrifying than Pennywise itself, and Lillis was able to run the gamut of emotion needed to sell the role in its entirety. Another person deserving ample recognition, though not one of the child actors, is Bill Skarsgard. He had the difficult job of reinventing a character that was both feared and revered by fans of the 1990 mini-series starring Tim Curry. Skarsgard was able to make Pennywise his own, especially with the voicing of it, and was able to successfully bring terror to a whole new generation. 

As great as the kids who make up the cast and the story of IT are, what sent this movie over the top was its setting of Derry, Maine. What may be unknown to some, is that Derry is not a real place, but is in fact a fictional one based on a small town in Maine, which just so happens to be where I have lived my whole life. I have grown up with people being fascinated by the fact that I live in the same town as Stephen King, and up until IT, I hadn't seen a big budget film based on his works that had shown the true nature of his hometown. I can tell any viewer who may be wondering, yes, IT did an incredible job at mimicking the look and feel of the town in which it was set. I can't even seem to find the words to express how surreal it is to see landmarks I have been driving passed for over twenty years, be recreated in a film I know to have been viewed by millions. The immense dedication and time the creators of IT took to make sure Derry looked like its' inspiration is what truly took this film from being one that I really enjoyed, to one that I absolutely loved. 

IT: Chapter Two's release is quickly approaching, and I find that I am actually more excited for the continuation than I was for this one. Not because I think it will be better, but because I now know how brilliant the creative team behind the film is. If IT: Chapter One is indicative of how potentially frightening or bizarrely humorous Chapter Two may be, than its practically guaranteed to be great.  

Rating: 3/5 

Thanks to Octavia Spencer, Ma is upgraded into a horror movie worth watching. 

Maggie Thompson (Diana Silvers) has just been forced to move from California to Ohio with her mom. On her first day of school, she befriends Andy (Corey Fogelmanis), Haley (McKaley Miller), Chaz (Gianni Paolo), and Darrell (Dante Brown). Her four new friends are very much into the party scene, and it is not long before they ask Maggie to try and get alcohol for them. 

Outside a convenient store,  Maggie is desperately trying to stay on the good side of her new friends, and is asking the people who enter the store to buy them booze. She is seemingly getting nowhere, until she meets a woman named Sue Ann (Octavia Spencer) who agrees to help the teenagers out. At first, they are excited about the prospect of having someone be their alcohol supplier, but Sue Ann, who begins to go only by the name of "Ma", becomes too obsessed with the life of the party. 

Going into Ma, I didn't have very high expectations, so I wasn't overly disappointed when the film proved to be fairly unoriginal. It follows the similar archetypes found in any horror movie centered around the illegal escapades of teens, but I wouldn't categorize it as being bad because of that. There are only so many plot lines that can be in existence, so completely critiquing this movie based on the fact that the story is a tad cliche seems a bit unfair. What did make me give this movie a lower rating was the very forced attempt at creating backstory for the characters. A major part of Ma's storyline takes place in flashbacks, and that part seems fine most of the time, but there are small and insignificant moments where the teenaged roles are bringing up painful pieces of their past, in an effort to give their characters depth, but they just fall completely flat. You can see right through the facade of the writers trying to get the audience to care about the people on the screen, but sadly, for any of the teenage cast members, their performances and delivery still make their characters very one dimensional.  

What turns Ma into a slightly more than adequate horror movie, is without a doubt Octavia Spencer. Her acting talent is far beyond any of the actors playing the teenagers, and in any scene she's in, she outshine everyone else in the film. There are many parts of Ma where it is clear they were heavily inspired by Misery, and Ma's Annie Wilkes-like tendencies are hard to pull off without over doing it. She's one of those villains that knows how to make the audience fear her, but also see her point of view and almost even take her side at times. Octavia Spencer treads on that border of staying creepy, but not going so far as to make Ma into more of a caricature than a person.  

Between the lackluster attempts at a resolution and the general sense of confusion, the ending of Ma was much more disappointing than I would have liked. The build up and exposition was great, and definitely had its scares and enough horror movie tension to make the audience happy, but it all seemed to fall apart a bit in the last twenty minutes. Had the climax of the film been stretched out and had more detail or explanation added, it definitely wouldn't have felt so chaotic and rushed. There was such great potential for this to be a really decent horror movie, but it almost was as if the creators knew they had a great lead, but weren't one-hundred percent sure what to do with the rest of their material. 

Here's the thing, even with my comments previously stated above, I would still watch Ma again. Sometimes, when you're in the mood to watch horror movie or a thriller, and you don't want to sit down and watch one that will deeply disturb you, or maybe push the limit too far, Ma is a perfect choice. It definitely has its unsettling moments, but not enough to make you have to psych yourself up to give it another viewing. 

Rating: 4.25/5 

There's nothing like a good shark movie to get you in the mood for summer, and the Reef is a definite one to watch. 

Off the coast of Australia, a man named Luke (Damian Walshe-Howling) earns a living delivering yachts. On one trip, he decides to invite some friends along for the journey. Matt (Gyton Grantley, his sister Kate (Zoe Naylor), and his girlfriend Suzie (Adrienne Pickering) have all agreed to join Luke and another sailor named Warren (Kieran Darcy-Smith) on the delivery to Indonesia. 

At first, all seems well on the ship, and everyone appears to be having a grand time. However, when the boat hits the reef and begins to capsize, the five passengers find themselves stuck with the impossible decision of remaining on the overturned boat, or facing the open seas and all that could lurk beneath the surface.  

The Reef is most certainly a lesser known shark movie, but it shouldn’t be that way. This film thrives on the use of realistic fears, tension, and shark footage; three things that are generally lacking from your cliche summer-shark blockbuster. The “drama” that is found in the Reef doesn’t appear to be at all fabricated, in fact it feels just the opposite. Every fight or emotion that is portrayed by the characters makes absolute sense to the situation in which they have found themselves. There’s no need for extended death scenes or fake scares, this movie is aiming to be realistic, and realistic it definitely is.

The Reef may not be the ideal film for someone who is looking for the next cheesy shark movie. There’s a minimal amount of action in this film, but it is replaced by heart rate increasing tension. The creators of the Reef rely on the audiences' ability to become ill at ease with the thought of being so completely vulnerable and exposed in the ocean, with absolutely nowhere to hide or escape, and the reliance pays off. For me, one of my worst fears is being stranded in the middle of the open sea, and this movie preys on that fear in the worst and best way. I found myself being more anxious watching this movie than I have with any other shark film to date, and I’ve seen a lot of them, so that’s saying something.

Other than its realistic approach to a shark story, what also makes the Reef so great is its less is more tactic. For this movie, there’s really only one major setting and five actors; nothing more, and nothing less. By having such an intimate cast be dropped into the expansive setting of the ocean, the audience is able to create a stronger connection to the characters. There’s no distractions to pull the viewers attention away from the main plot at hand. You are invested in the survival of the people floating in the water, and it is near to impossible to think of anything else until the movie is over.

There are many people who critique shark movies for being unscientific or unrealistic, but I don’t know many people who watch a shark film for an overwhelming sense of accuracy. If you don’t agree, consider the fact that there’s been six Sharknado movies. With that being said, the Reef is one that definitely attempts realism with its facts and portrayal of the ocean. It is because of this, that even when you’re home on the safety of your couch, you still want to tuck legs in while watching, to keep them from dangling a little too much over the edge.

Rating: 4.75/5

Jordan Peele's latest film Us, once again proves that straying from the pack is exactly what's needed for the horror genre. 

Adelaide Wilson (Lupita Nyong'o) is returning to her childhood beach house with her family. Her husband and kids are excited about the summer escape, but Adelaide is having increasing anxiety about being so close to the pier at Santa Cruz. Unbeknownst to Adelaide's husband Gabe (Winston Duke), when she was young, she experienced an incredibly traumatic event at the pier's house of mirrors where she came face to face with her own double. 

After telling her story to Gabe, he attempts to be supportive, but clearly thinks there's no merit to Adelaide's worries of her doppelgänger creeping up onto their family. However, before he can even take the time to fully process it, a family of four appear in their driveway. In the blink of an eye, the Wilson's vacation is turned into a nightmare with seemingly no chance of waking up. 

Us is a movie that is certainly categorized as a member of the horror genre, but tackles the concept in a very different way. It is frightening for sure, but not because of gratuitous violence or predictable jump scares. Instead, it unsettles the viewer with the subtlety and unease of its' atmosphere. The plucking of the violin strings in the score or the lack of fluidity of the movements of some of the characters, all blend together to create a very impressive horror film. 

It's rare to see a horror movie and walk out thinking, "wow, that was really well made", but Jordan Peele has made it clear that it is very possible. He seems to approach his films with the thought process that the horror genre can be respectable and just as deserving of awards and praise as any other style of movie. His eye for what can cause fright combined with what will be visually stunning is uncanny. I can't think of many other times where I have watched a scary movie and been just as focused on the beauty of the scene as well as the fear induced rapid beating of my heart. 

Us could not have been an easy movie to make, what with each character having an evil double that makes an appearance at some point throughout the film. Peele, along with the actors, should be strongly commended for their work on this film. Nyang'o's two characters are vastly different, yet oddly alike at times. One is highly terrifying, especially with the quality of her voice, and the other is fiercely maternal and protective. Both performances given by Nyang'o are brilliant, and are the empowered backbone of the movie.  Peele's skill for humor definitely shines through the terror of the film, and those moments are perfectly delivered by Winston Duke. He works the comedy in at the exact right moments, and avoids the age old problem most horror movies face, where they use a poorly placed joke to make up for the lack of skill behind the movie. Jordan Peele is one of the few who can blend fear and comedy together to create a cinematic masterpiece. 

Many who have reviewed this film have spent too much time comparing it to Get Out, and if you do that, you may find yourself not enjoying this movie as much as you should. If you watch Us for its' brilliance and not as a comparison, you will have a very hard time not finding it to be a very impressive and frightening piece of cinema. 

Rating: 3.5/5

If Kevin McCallister grew up to become a reclusive neurotic, you would have the general plot for 2018's Halloween. 

Forty years after Michael Meyers terrorized the members of a small town, Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis), has never been able to get over her night of horror that happened those many years ago. She has practically alienated any family relationships she may have had, due to her constant obsession of preparing for the day when Michael comes back. 

Meanwhile two podcasters have decided to investigate the case and reopen the wounds of those involved. Their attempts at speaking to Michael or Laurie get them no where, and they feel they are at a dead end with their investigation, but little do they know, they will soon have more than just past events to focus on. 

For me, the beginning and end of Halloween were much better than anything that occurred in the middle. In the original Halloween, Michael had reasons for his slayings, however vague or barbaric they may have been. In this film, Michael appeared to have many more times where he killed just for the sake of killing. I know this tactic was common in any of the numerous sequels to the original film, but considering this movie was supposed to be a direct continuation to the 70's Halloween, I was hoping for a bit more reasoning behind the murders committed by Michael, so that the movie would come off as well thought out and not just a typical teen blood bash.  

Though it comes as no surprise, Jamie Lee Curtis was, of course, the best part of Halloween. Many so called "scream queen" actors and actresses have tried to hide or put their horror movie pasts behind them, but not Curtis. She revels in it, and with good reason; she's really great at being the hard core heroine of a horror film. The other characters in the movie are clearly there for the sake of being a number added to the body count, and aren't even significant enough to have their names fully remembered. Had it not been for Curtis, the movie would have run the risk of turning into just another cliche slasher film.

I think the biggest issue I had with Halloween, was that I went into it with my hopes too high. Yes, it is thousands of times better than 99% of its' predecessors, excluding the original of course, but it just feels more generic than I would have liked. That being said, there was a brief scene where a tracking shot was used to create suspense, and I was quite impressed with that sequence. That scene alone was unique and refreshing for the more recent horror genre, so kudos to the creators in that respect. 

Comparing Halloween to the modern horror climate, it is definitely above most of what is released these days. I don't know how much of an ambition I will ever have to watch this again, but it was definitely worth a full run through. 

Rating: 4.75/5

The Babadook is as ominous as it is frightening, and is a horror film that is unlike the majority. 

Amelia (Essie Davis) has been a widow since the day of her son Samuel's (Noah Wisemann) birth. Seven years later, Amelia has been struggling to cope with the loss of her husband, and with her son's incessant fear of their being monsters in the house. One night, Samuel brings a new book to bed for a story, but it is one that Amelia has never seen and has no recollection of where it could have come from. Upon reading the first few pages, both Amelia and Sam are terrified by the contents of the book; a monster who goes by the name of the Babadook and preys upon young children in their sleep. 

With the discovery of the Babadook, Samuel's phobia of monsters increases and Amelia personal strain starts to become unbearable. Soon, she herself becomes taken over by the fear of the Babadook, and neither mother nor son can tell what's real anymore. 

The Babadook is similar to films like Hereditary with its' lack of conformity to the rules of mainstream horror. For the most part, The Babadook uses a less is more approach when it comes to the actual horror in the film. There are few jump scares in comparison to the amount of disturbing imagery that sticks in your brain, almost making you wish you'd closed your eyes beforehand. Given that this an Australian film, and not one made in America, it makes sense that the style of horror would be different to what we would normally see here, and it is incredibly refreshing. 

When it comes to the performances by its' two leads, the acting is stellar. Both child and mother go through some grueling character transformations throughout the film's duration. Samuel begins the movie as an erratic and out of control child, but as his mother becomes more and more unhinged by the fear of the Babadook, Samuel begins to mellow out and has to start taking control. Both characters have physically and mentally exhaustive scenes, making the viewer feel worn out by the end of the film. 

The Babadook is clearly full of metaphors from beginning to end, but it's almost hard to notice the symbolism, because you are so taken aback and distressed by the images on the screen. One the one hand, kudos to the director/writer for creating a horror movie that wasn't just about violence and gore, but on the other hand, by using the metaphors, the actual story of the movie becomes slightly confusing. 

This movie had a lot if hype upon its' initial release, having many people claim it to be the scariest movie since the Exorcist. So many films have tried to live up to this monicker, but rarely succeed, even if the publicity says otherwise. However, the Babadook comes very close to matching the fear and disturbing tone brought to the screen by the Exorcist. The Babadook  is deeply unsettling at times and genuinely terrifying. It is without a doubt, one of the better horror films to come out in recent history. 

Rating: 4/5 

Split is an intense film with a lead that is better than its' direction.

Casey Cooke (Anya Taylor-Joy) is a reserved teenager who keeps to herself, but has been invited to a birthday party fir one of her classmates, Claire (Haley Lu Richardson). After the party, Casey is offered a ride home by Claire's dad along with Claire's friend, Marcia (Jessica Sula). While waiting in the car, the girls are terrified when a stranger gets in and sprays them with a gas the knocks them unconscious. 

When they wake up, the girls discover they are being held captive in a dark room with seemingly no escape. Trying to figure a way out of their horrifying situation, Casey attempts to discern who their captor is. At first, he presents himself as a man named Dennis (James McAvoy), who is compulsively clean, but when they hear a woman's voice and scream for help, they are shocked to see that it is in fact the same man, but in different clothes and an alarmingly different personality. 

M. Night Shyamalan is quite the confusing director. He started out his career being highly thought of, but his movies began to become overly complicated and even laughable at times. When he came out with the Visit in 2015, it seemed that his films might be heading in an upward direction, and then Split came on the the scene and proved that he hadn't completely lost his touch. Yes, this movie sadly has some of his unfortunate trademarks such as overly stylized shots, editing, and dialogue, but the story itself is creative and even shocking at times. 

Hands down, the best part of Split is the phenomenal performance given by James McAvoy. It could not have been easy to portray so many different facets of one man, but he also had the challenge of making the audience believe that each personality he presented was actually a different character. His talent is undeniable when you are able to witness him go from a character like Dennis, that is so meticulous and frightening, to Hedwig, who is an intelligent and humorous 9-year old boy. Both characters come off as incredibly genuine and they are just two of the eight personalities that take the spotlight throughout the film. 

Given the use of flashback to tell Casey's tragic story, it is clear that she is supposed to be the hero that the audience is rooting for, but her scenes were actually not my favorite ones in the movie. The scenes between McAvoy's characters and their therapist, Dr. Fletcher, played by Betty Buckley, were the ones that were the most memorable for me. The chemistry between the two actors is just part of what sold the complicated concept of Split. Their scenes together were also some of the most intense and unsettling to behold. 

Overall, Split was a much better film than I had anticipated it to be. I had partially written off Shyamalan's work, so I didn't go into the movie with very high expectations. The story and performances are what make Split so impressive, even if Shyamalan's overly directed scenes give off the feeling that he is still in film school and really trying to impress his professor. 

Rating: 4.5/5

In what is essentially a Simon Pegg and Nick Frost movie with an American backdrop, Zombieland is equal parts hilarious, disgusting, and fun. 

Amongst the deserted streets of America, Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg) is fighting for survival in a zombie infested wasteland. The only reason he has stayed alive as long as he has, is because he follows a very strict set of rules. However, his rules are put to the test when he stumbles upon Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), a zombie killing machine in search of the last remaining Twinkie. 

Columbus and Tallahassee make the decision to stick with one another as they travel across the country. On their travels, they meet two girls, Wichita (Emma Stone) and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin). Attempting to increase their chances of survival, the four of them decide to take on Zombieland together. 

Though it is clear that Zombieland took inspiration from other horror-comedy films like Shaun of the Dead, it has plenty of its' own originality to make it a unique and hilarious addition to its' genre. Of the many creative elements that were put into Zombieland, Columbus' rule book sticks out to me as one of the movie's best. Not only do his guidelines actually make sense, but the way they appear on the screen and become a part of the enfolding action is truly innovative. 

Considering that this is a movie about an apocalyptic world, there is obviously going to be a minimal amount of living characters in the film. Jesse Eisenberg has played awkward and timid roles before, but I think Zombieland is where he does it best. His character could very easily have been obnoxious or irritating by the end of the film, but Eisenberg was able to give Columbus just the right amount of quirkiness to make his character lovable and someone to root for. Not to be forgotten are the excellent performances by the rest of the cast. Harrelson perfectly portrays Tallahassee. He gives his character all the traits of someone who was born to hunt zombies, but is also able to bring unexpected emotion into the role. 

Though they sometimes don't get much recognition, I feel that the special effects make-up department that worked on Zombieland deserve just as much credit as the director and cast. Not only do the zombies take a slightly different spin on the classic look of the living dead, but each one is made up to look different from the other. Even when they are swarming around their victim in a grizzly hoard, you can spot the differences between every zombie, and it is that incredible attention to detail that makes Zombieland not only an entertaining film to watch, but an impressive one as well. 

Zombieland is a movie that has the unusual ability to make me laugh and be nauseous all at the same time. Whenever I watch it, I know that it will make my stomach turn, but it is always worth it. 

Rating: 5/5

The films of Alfred Hitchcock can fall into many different categories. Some are thrilling, others are full of romance, espionage and adventure. Psycho is one that is full of suspense and terror. 

Secretary Marion Crane (Janet Leigh) wants nothing more than to be able to marry her boyfriend Sam, but due to financial constraints they are unable to wed. When her boss entrusts her with depositing 40,000 dollars in cash, Marion decides to take the money and run. 

Fleeing from her crime, Marion finds herself exhausted and stuck driving in a rain storm. She pulls into the vacant Bates Motel run by Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins). At first the motel seems quaint and eclectic and Norman appears shy and kind, but Marion soon learns that there is more going than what meets the eye. 

Though Hitchcock made numerous movies that achieved lasting critical acclaim, Psycho may be his most famous film. His movies often dealt with brutal or intense plot lines, but Psycho was arguably his most violent to date. The scenes in which it is famous for are still shocking to watch, even though it is a horror film that was made in 1960.

Other than the iconic shower scene, what makes Psycho a lasting classic is the brilliant performance by Anthony Perkins as Norman Bates. The other actors' portrayals in the film are done quite well, but Norman Bates will always be the stand out character of the film. Perkins is able to give Norman a sweet and self-conscious outward appearance, but allows his eyes to give a glimpse into Norman's secretive and sinister mind.

Psycho is a movie where all the elements come together to create a cinema masterpiece. The score is one of the most memorable pieces of film music. It accents each scene, aiding in its' ability to add terror to the already frightening moments created by Alfred Hitchcock. Where other movies may have been too afraid to push boundaries, Hitchcock knocked down walls in order to bring Psycho to its' highest potential. 

It says a lot about the quality of a film for it to leave a long lasting impression. Psycho is a film that has been considered legendary for many years, and will continue to have the same impact for many more decades to come. Though it was made over forty years ago, Psycho remains to be one of the most frightening and unsettling horror movies of all time.

Rating: 5/5

Feeling reminiscent of the older days of horror, The Conjuring is by far one of the best films to come to the horror genre within the past ten years. 

In the year 1971, paranormal investigators Ed (Patrick Wilson) and Lorraine (Vera Farmiga) Warren have become famous for their ability to cure houses of their haunted spirits. The Perron family have just recently moved into their new home when they begin to notice strange and frightening events happening throughout the house. The clocks all stop at the same time, one of their daughters begins to sleepwalk, and unexplained noises and smells begin to emerge from within the walls of their home. Fearing for the safety of their daughters, the Perrons ask the Warrens to help them rid their house of the evil that is terrorizing their family. 

I remember seeing the Conjuring for the first time in theaters, and just based on the opening credits I could tell that it was going to be a great movie. With the film being set in the early 70s, the filmmakers not only made sure that the costumes and settings fit the time period, but that the style of the film and even the font of the opening title created a movie experience that would take the viewer to the film's decade. 

What I love about this movie is that it takes the time to set the tone of the film. It doesn't rush into the scares and isn't afraid to be informative. It is that patient and detailed quality that makes the Conjuring far less frustrating than other horror films that carelessly leave plot holes throughout their duration in order to bring the horror early on. The Conjuring is an intelligent horror film, making all their scares seem expertly and effortlessly placed. 

The characters of Ed and Lorraine Warren were based on two people that actually investigated cases such as the one in the film. The real Lorraine Warren was present on the set of the film and perhaps that is why the relationship between the two actors who play the investigators seems so real. They are able to bring an authenticity to the roles and it makes even the simple scenes of them researching be intriguing and adds an emotional backbone to the film. 

Where so many horror movies rely on blood and gore to sell their story, the Conjuring thrives on style and sound. I admire the skill that it takes to make a movie truly frightening without having to make it incredibly violent or disgusting, and the Conjuring proves that you don't need to rely on cheap gimmicks in order to be terrifying. I rarely watch the same horror movie more than twice, but the Conjuring is one that I have seen many times, and will most certainly watch again.