Starring: Ry Barrett, Andrea Pavlovic and Cameron Love
Directed by: Chris Nash
Rated: NR
Running Time: 94 minutes
IFC Films and Shudder
Our Score: 4 out of 5 Stars
Is it possible to reinvent the slasher genre in the 21st century? I think there’s always a discussion about it, but I ultimately think it’s incredibly difficult, especially since some confuse reinvigorating with reinventing. It’s hard to transform the slasher genre because it’s solely built on the singular purpose of seeing people killed in brutal ways. I’m not saying it’s too simplistic, but I’ve rarely seen instances of films attempting to reinvent one of horror cinema’s greatest wheels. The most recent occurrence of reinvention is when Wes Craven unleashed “Scream” upon the world. That being said, “In a Violent Nature” comes pretty damn close.
I wasn’t sold immediately as “In a Violent Nature” opened on a deteriorating structure in the middle of a lush summertime forest. We hear a few men off-screen talking over the sounds of nature; birds, the rustling of trees in the soft breeze and the like. Then we see a locket necklace removed from a pipe shooting out of the ground. That removal is what causes our main character to emerge from the hardened, yet seemingly fresh dirt below. Johnny (Ry Barrett) crawls out of the Earth from his undead slumber and begins to shamble around the pristine woods around him. The cameras follow Johnny throughout “In a Violent Nature,” sometimes methodically, sometimes suspensefully, but ultimately with an unspoken purpose.
It’s easy to compare “In a Violent Nature” to a film like the remake of “Maniac,” where we see not only have a first person view of the killer’s world, but hear his internal monologue. “In a Violent Nature” is third person and we never get to hear what Johnny is thinking. You could almost say that we more or less see what happens during other slashers as our main killer lumbers towards an unspeakable goal or illogical destination. You can joke that in other slashers, the killer is generally just twiddling their thumbs or possibly checking their Instagram notifications as they await another teenage victim to slash and gash. Instead, we’re left to ponder for several long lapses what Johnny is doing. Revenge? Bloodlust? Boredom?
Come to think of it, I really wasn’t sold on “In a Violent Nature,” until the film’s second kill. The film juxtapositions these moments of brutality with Johnny calmly walking about. We see him as he encounters the stereotypical group of teenagers looking to camp in a place they shouldn’t be, and how he reacts. Johnny doesn’t necessarily react the way we’ve imagined Jason Vorhees or others before Johnny. Vorhees jump scares into the picture, machete in hand, and quickly mutilates his victims. Johnny just walks up. Is that what Vorhees, Krueger and Myers have been doing all along? Casually strolling up? Like slashers before him, Johnny seems focused on a singular notion, but what is that notion? What drives Johnny? At a certain point, does Johnny’s backstory answer our burning questions or merely attempt to explain the unexplainable? “In a Violent Nature” performs an autopsy and you’re left to wonder what all the different organs are and why some are disfigured while others aren’t.
The film checks all the slasher boxes, a memorable killer, creative and gruesome kills, the drowning feeling of isolation, and a pace that balances viciousness with quiet curiosity. Is “In a Violent Nature” a deconstruction of the genre, much like “Cabin in the Woods?” It’s difficult to say because the silence breeds speculation and ultimately makes the viewer deconstruct the film more than the genre. “In a Violent Nature” starts out as an homage and slowly becomes a social commentary like great slashers before it. Slashers have always tapped into societal trauma, like the breakdown of safe spaces, whether it be a pristine lake in the woods or the safety of a suburban community on Halloween. The main thing it tapped into was a fear of the unknown. It’s very human to be fearful or anxious of the uncertainty and unseen around us. It’s what made “The Strangers” so effective, murderers can come for you just because. So, in today’s digital age of data where we have access to a wide range of sources and information, we fail to remember one thing that “In a Violent Nature” reminds us of, some things will never be explained. Johnny, just like the universe, may just be random and cruel. While some may suffer fates worse than death, survivors will be haunted by its unanswered questions.
Starring: Kue Lawrence, Kai Cech, and Max Malas
Directed by: Daniel DelPurgatorio
Rated: NR
Running Time: 92 minutes
Our Score: 4 out of 5 Stars
As someone pointed out during the Q&A following the world premiere of “Marshmallow” at Panic Fest 2025, director Daniel DelPurgatorio broke a few unspoken rules with his debut feature: making a horror movie that’s set almost entirely at night at a summer camp and a cast filled with actual kids and preteens. That would be a logistical nightmare for most filmmakers, but DelPurgatorio handles it all with a confidence that feels effortless. More importantly, he makes a clear statement: he’s a visionary horror director worth watching—and worth buying advance tickets for.
Morgan (Kue Lawrence) isn’t thrilled about his first summer camp experience. He already struggles to make friends in his neighborhood, and he’s carrying trauma on two fronts. Before the events of the film, Morgan narrowly escaped death, while his grandfather—the one adult in his life who truly understood him—didn’t. Now, sent off to camp without his emotional anchor, Morgan faces bullies, shaky friendships, a maybe-summer-girlfriend, and a potential killer lurking in the dead of night. But it’s just Morgan’s trauma feeding off an old campfire tale told every year, right?
With a pulsating score, expertly timed jump scares, and a mystery that unravels in clever, unexpected ways, “Marshmallow” quickly reveals itself to be more than just another camp slasher. It’s also a sharp, funny coming-of-age story. Morgan is instantly likeable—you root for him the moment he’s introduced—and when the bullies show up, you want to jump into the screen and defend him yourself. His friend Dirk (Max Malas) nearly steals every scene he’s in. In fact, it’s impressive that in a movie featuring Broken Lizard alum Paul Soter as the camp leader, it’s Malas who ends up with the biggest comedic moments. Malas is like an impressive opening band that suddenly has the headliner re-examining themselves.
Even though most of the cast is made up of kids, the film doesn’t shy away from violence—but it never crosses a line into exploitation. The pain feels real, but not manipulative. The balance is impressive: the scares and stakes hit hard, but so do the emotional beats. As the story builds toward its climax, “Marshmallow” doesn’t lose steam. Instead, it smacks the audience with a series of satisfying, genuinely surprising revelations that deepen the story and make us root even harder for these characters. For that, credit goes to screenwriter Andy Greskoviak.
Honestly, credit goes all around. There are so many horror films where child actors sink the production or where the filmmakers don’t quite know what to do with them. But “Marshmallow” threads that needle with textbook precision. In some ways, “Marshmallow” is a lot like last year’s “In a Violent Nature,” both offer up a fresh take on slasher tropes we know and love, while helping modernize a genre that sometimes feels like it has nothing better to do than live in the 80s.
Starring: Madelyn Cline, Chase Sui Wonders and Jennifer Love Hewitt
Directed by: Jennifer Kaytin Robinson
Rated: R
Running Time: 111 minutes
Sony Pictures
Our Score: 3 out of 5 Stars
There’s not a deep well of nostalgia for “I Know What You Did Last Summer,” even though I fall squarely in its target demographic. While the 1997 film probably played at countless slumber parties, I was more interested in ‘80s slashers like “Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan” and “A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors.” That’s not to say I skipped the original and its 1998 sequel. I just never went deeper with the 2006 direct-to-video sequel or the short-lived Amazon series. That said, nostalgia is a powerful thing, and I may have enjoyed this 2025 reboot/sequel more than it probably deserves.
The formula remains unchanged: a group of teens does something terrible and tries to cover it up, only to be stalked by a killer in a fisherman’s raincoat. This time, the inciting incident involves a group of five young adults causing a car to veer off a cliff and into the ocean, thanks to one of them goofing around in the street while high. It’s a shaky start, not just because the setup feels contrived, but because it raises questions about whether they’d even be charged with murder under existing law. It might’ve been cleaner, and way more relevant, to have them hit someone while distracted by TikTok or shopping on Etsy.
The first 30 minutes are a slog, nearly nap-worthy, but things pick up once the hook-wielding fisherman shows up and makes a mess with a harpoon. From there, the film taps into its nostalgia engine. Freddie Prinze Jr. returns with a seaman’s beard, weathered charm, and the same heartthrob energy that made him famous. Jennifer Love Hewitt, now playing a psychology professor, also makes a welcomed return. With a dead serious face, she gives the teens predictably awful advice that works perfectly in this kind of film. At this point, I was fully on board this sinking ship, content to go down with it. Because while this isn’t a good movie, it is pretty damn fun.
That fun comes in spite of a script littered with pointless side characters, wandering subplots, and character decisions so illogical they’d make a puzzle book combust. The tone swings wildly from serious to silly, and the attempts at humor mostly fall flat. Even the film’s biggest “wink” moment lands with the laughter and joy of a tax audit. A tighter runtime might’ve helped, but instead the film drags longer than necessary, testing your patience between the kills.
Like the 1997 original, this 2025 edition still lives in the shadow of “Scream,” chasing that meta-slasher magic nearly 30 years later. And while it never matches “Scream’s” cleverness, there is a sense of fun that seeps through, especially during the kill sequences. The deaths are satisfyingly brutal, and the film actually does a better job crafting a believable killer than the original.
It’s not a genre-defining entry like “In a Violent Nature,” nor is it as viciously funny as “The Monkey,” but it comfortably lands in the middle of the 2025 horror pack. There are better horror films out this year, but there are far worse, too.
I’m not a fan of ranking my top movies of the year. I haven’t done it for MediaMikes since 2019. Looking back, I would have switched out like three films on my best of that year, and years before, because, in general, your favorite films will sometimes reveal themselves over time. However, the ones I listed as the worst that year are still pretty damn bad and have aged like Demi Moore towards the end of “The Substance.”
Movies sometimes take a while to resonate. They need to marinate. Sometimes what we loved at the time loses it’s luster. Just ask the Academy how they feel about “Shakespeare in Love,” “Crash,” or “Green Book.” But 2024 has become a different beast entirely. I’m sure there’s various years like this past one, but 2024 has been weird because I’m not sure if I could rank my favorites film, much less condense my favorite films down to 10, which I generally feel like I can do soundly most years. Yes, you can call it a cop out or say I’m not doing my critical duty.
So, when I decided to make a top films of the year list for 2024, I felt like I needed to try and include a muddled mess because overall it was such a good year for film. It really was, I didn’t walk away from too many movies feeling like I had completely wasted my time or wanting to punch the director. The list below is made of films that deserve to be talked about or mentioned, but may not deserve the top spot. But honestly, would any of these films deserve the top spot? Which ones would muscle out others in a duke ’em out battle for the top 10? Seems unfair to me. So, without a futher ado…
Best Films of 2024 in No Particular Order:
“Furiosa”
What the hell happened to this? “Furiosa” came and went, and now it’s not even being mentioned in most critics groups or awards shows. Did we forget that Chris Hemsworth played a perfectly delusional wasteland emperor? Did we forget that George Miller is still an action scene aficionado that speaks volumes in chaos? If you need the perfect prologue to Miller’s magnum opus, “Fury Road,” then you need to sit your butt down and watch “Furiosa.”
“September 5”
In my review (which hasn’t been published yet) I mentioned my bias for this film, being a journalist and reporter. From the opening scene, my eyeballs were absolutely glued to the screen, so much so that I couldn’t pry them off until the credits began to roll. It’s not a film with stellar performances that will leave your jaw on the floor, or a story that you don’t know already, but it’s the riveting nature in which it tells the daily, if not minute-by-minute, ethical choices made in newsrooms everyday.
“Memoirs of a Snail”
I’ve never seen Adam Elliot’s prior films, but now I need to. I didn’t think it was possible for a stop motion animated film to not only spiritually break me, but build me back up again. “Memoirs of a Snail” is for the little guy, the weirdo, the outcast, the person that doesn’t feel like they fit anywhere in society. It speaks to us, and everyone actually, that we will find that person, thing or belief that will keep us going in a cruel world. Easily the most heart felt film of the year.
“Late Night with the Devil”
Part possession horror, part found footage, part late night parody, and part what in the hell just happened, “Late Night with the Devil” is David Dastchmalin’s feather in his cap. Shot like any bad late night talk show in the 70s/80s, this film keeps you guessing and has you biting your nails alongside Dastchmalin’s character. It drew headlines this year for it’s use of AI, but that’s just background noise, check this one out.
“Sing Sing”
I’ll go ahead and spoil something for you, (not the film) you’re not going to see “The Brutalist” on this list. I got what it was going for…art…the artist…humanity…but to me, “Sing Sing” was what “The Brutalist” was going for, with on-par performances and a runtime that didn’t leave me needing to piss twice. “Sing Sing” is compassionate, beautiful, and heartbreaking. Unlike “The Brutalist,” I left “Sing Sing” with a sense of hope that art could truly make the world, even if it’s just our own, a little bit better.
“Cannibal Mukbang”
Did this movie come out this year? Did anyone see this? Hell if I know. I saw it this past year at Kansas City’s Panic Fest this year, so it’s going on the list. You hear about how “no one makes films like this anymore.” That’s become so cliche I roll my eyes, but that is “Cannibal Mukbang.” It’s a genre blend that can make the case for not only being the best cannibal film of the year, but the best film about love this past year. Brave performances, a bold script, and a perfect reason to watch gooey gory schlock.
“The Wild Robot”
Just when you think you know what “The Wild Robot” is, it evolves. Without spoiling a single thing, I wasn’t expecting this movie to morph and shapeshift throughout its brief runtime so much. For a kid’s movie, this is pretty damn intelligent without boring the kiddos. Not only is the animation style incredibly gorgeous, but it’s the kind of film Pixar wishes they could still make. This and “Memoirs of a Snail” would have to duke it out for best animated film of the year.
“Nickel Boys”
In a year of memorable films, “Nickel Boys” carves out its own special place in your brain. Its visual storytelling is unique enough to be memorable, but it’s a story you won’t forget. It’s a tragic film about the human spirit and how optimism and pessimism both have a place in our world view. I do hope that a film like “Nickel Boys” not only reminds of America’s dark past, but how we’re still dealing with and handling those repercussions in our modern landscape.
“The Substance”
You know a film’s good when it’s lengthy runtime, in this case 141 minutes, feels brisk. “The Substance” isn’t just Demi Moore’s comeback, it’s a wild middle finger to society’s beauty standards. Sure, it’s about a Hollywood starlet, but Moore’s performance and role feels applicable to everyone. Sure, it’s ridiculous body horror in the vein of Cronenberg, but just like “The Fly,” it’s humorous and relatable, even when the guts come spilling out like a viscera volcano.
“Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes”
Just when you think the franchise couldn’t exist without Andy Serkis, a fourth installment comes along and continues its mind boggling effects and pertinent storytelling. While at first, it does feel like it’s missing a vital piece, this new tale with new characters pick up the slack and take us on a journey that’s filled with new moral quandaries, heart and a fresh sense of wanting to see where this story goes.
“Wicked”
Of course this is on here. It’s this year’s “Barbie.” While not as magnificently made as Greta Gerwig’s Mattel vision, “Wicked” is still a magnificent vision. Yes, I’m a sucker for a well-made musical, but this film really found that sweet spot between mainstream likeability and powerful messaging. I wasn’t even sold on the idea of this film, but about 30 minutes in realized I was dead wrong that anyone could bring the story to life in such a fantastic, rich way.
“In a Violent Nature”
As I stated in my review, is it possible to reinvent the slasher genre? It is the wheel of horror. While it doesn’t reinvent said wheel, it comes pretty damn close. It not only tells a great new slasher story, but deconstructs the slasher genre itself in a quiet foreboding way. In those long moments of silence and stalking, we’re able to reflect on the whys of the genre and why it continues to stand the stabbing test of time. Also, we get to watch some incredibly brutal kills.
“A Real Pain”
Me and my partner took away different interpretations of the ending as we left the theater. I’m not sure that was the film’s intention, but I think we both kind of reached the same conclusion without actually reaching that conclusion. This film is about the enduring power of love and humanity, and how it not only rings true in all our hearts, but echoes throughout time and generations. Also, Kieran Culkin is an absolute delight and deserves all the awards.
“I Saw the TV Glow”
Remember how I said time reveals your favorite films? While not initially sold as a great film after completing it, the film creeped into me over time. The aesthetic is a total fast ball pitch to Millennials like myself, but that wasn’t what stuck with me. Just like the main character, the movie poked at my regretfullness and how I perceive my own sense of personal growth. I’m middle aged and should have it all figured out…right? My nostalgia, my prior friendships and my unanswered questions continue to mold and shape me.
“The Apprentice”
I say this as apolitical as I can, but this might be the most glowing film about Donald Trump. Yes, the film still shows the Trump we all know, the adultering degenerate real estate tycoon who bullied his way to the top. But throughout the film’s runtime, we watch as Sebastian Stan becomes the man we all know, implying that Donald may not have always been the asshole we now know him as. It’s a shame Hollywood decided to hide this one because it’s legitimately good and the performances are next level.
“Anora”
Sean Baker, the co-creator of “Greg the Bunny,” has knocked it out of the park again with “Anora.” His slice of life films are some of the best in recent memory and this one ranks right up there with one of my other favorites of his, “The Florida Project.” I don’t know who Baker has for casting, but he’s always finding absolute diamonds in the rough. The cast, led by Mikey Madison, is absolutely flawless and the story is wild and melancholy.
“Joker: Folie à Deux”
I know what you’re thinking, “The shitty Joker sequel is on this list, but not “The Brutalist?”” Yes. Shoutout to John Waters for making me consider watching this film after it was absolutely review-bombed by critics and audiences. However, Joaquim Phoenix remains brilliant and Lady Gaga should probably play my insane ex in a film. Simply put, it’s an audacious toe-tapping middle finger to anti-heroes that makes us reflect on why we like them in the first place.
Honorable Mentions in No Particular Order:
“Didi”
“Alien: Romulus”
“Beetlejuice Beetlejuice”
“Infested”
“Challengers”
“Oddity”
“Hundreds of Beavers”
“Dune: Part Two”
“Azrael”
“Heretic”
“Queer”
“Deadpool and Wolverine”
“Monkey Man”
“Thelma”
“My Old Ass”
“Babygirl”
“Longlegs”
Final Thoughts
Horror is the real winner of 2024. Never have I seen such a quality range of widely released horrors ranging from bodily, slasher, aliens, ghosts and everything in between. Of course there were some stinkers, but that happens every year. It’s a topic for another day, but horror is simply a reflection of where we’re at as a society or culture. We see that horror leaking into other films on this list like “Memoirs of a Snail,” “Real Pain” and even “The Brutalist.” The horrors of reality, the horrors of our past, the horrors of those around us, the horrors of ourselves; the horrors of everything. 2024 is us screaming into the void trying to make sense of it all, just like this year’s best films.
Other than that, I’ll admit, there’s some controversial shit on my list. But you’re going to find that on everyone’s from 2024. It wasn’t necessarily a year where a handful of films rose above the rest to shout “Pick me! Pick me!” There’s films I didn’t watch and films that just didn’t click with me (yes…like “The Brutalist”). I do think 2024 will be a year where the Academy makes a selection that will not stand the test of time. The thing that does stand the test of time though…what resonated with you in these tough times.
Starring: Jordan Myers, Maya Jeyam and Tony White
Directed by: Quinn Armstrong
Rated: NR
Running Time: 80 minutes
Cranked Up
Our Score: 3 out of 5 Stars
When we first meet Mandy (Jordan Myers), she’s waking up, getting showered, listening to catchy pop music and preparing for a great spring break day at a cabin. “Dead Teenagers” quickly dives into tropes, showing all of Mandy’s cliche friends and basically implying that Mandy will most likely be our final girl. Once the chess pieces have been set up, it’s only a matter of time before a psychotic masked man arrives to begin the slicing and dicing. However, our serial killer accidentally dies without a single horny teenager harmed in the process. That’s when the teens find a screenplay, called “Dead Teenagers.”
The first thing that really came to mind about “Dead Teenagers” (the movie, not the script) is “Cabin in the Woods.” It’s kind of hard to escape the shadow of the perfect trope send-up. That initial thought slowly dissolved over time though. While not as clever as the aforementioned film, “Dead Teenagers” shows what happens to all the horror film cliche characters as they grasp that their reality is now confined to a cabin and have their hands on the script. Each character in their own way, becomes the villain in an attempt to survive.
While I won’t say how the insanity unfolds, contorts and eventually concludes, I will state that the film feels more complete if you’ve watched the prior two films, “The Exorcism of Saint Patrick” and “Wolves Against the World,” that Quinn Armstrong has written and directed for his so-called “Fresh Hell” anthology trilogy. A lot of that has to do with the fact that the films have, at points, used similar actors, crew, settings and ideas.
The obvious conceit in all these films, other than being different horror genres, is dealing with emotional truths in an isolated setting. Even then, it’s nothing original, which kind of hampers the whole “fresh hell” idea. What’s kind of interesting about it though, is that “Dead Teenagers” feels like it’s being obvious. The title, the characters, the set-up, everything. What inevitably ends up making it unique is how self-reflective it is on the creative writing process.
Without rehashing the prior two films, and instead focusing on “Dead Teenagers,” what have we learned from the slasher genre? It’s stranger danger, the reflection of serial killers, the punishing of promiscuous teens, the inability to trust men, gender role reversals, racism, gentrification, trauma, unreliable narrators, etc. Mandy could be viewed as the writer, struggling to reinvent the wheel. Since “Wes Craven’s Final Nightmare” and “Scream,” you could make the argument that the slasher genre can only subvert expectations at this point without simply starting the whole process over.
Diving back into the two prior films, we see that attempt being made and getting a mixed bag. Sometimes the reinvention process falls flat or finds a sweet soft spot not yet found, but Armstrong can’t quite do that here. Instead he finds that, just like in this year’s “In a Violent Nature,” the reinvention is finding new and cruel ways to punish the on-screen teens. That all being said, “Dead Teenagers” is better after watching Armstrong’s prior films. Without them, “Dead Teenagers” barely hits the mark.
Starring: Emma Stone, Jesse Plemons and Aidan Delbis Directed by: Yorgos Lanthimos Rated: R Running Time: 118 minutes Focus Features
Film Score: 4 out of 5 Stars
4K Score: 1.5 out of 5 Stars
What used to be fringe is now mainstream. Conspiracy theories permeate American life, fueled by a mix of civic ignorance and algorithms designed to feed us junk science, paranoia, and rage. That’s why a film like “Bugonia” doesn’t just feel timely, but it feels uncomfortably real, like a mirror being held up to society while society refuses to look.
Michelle Fuller (Emma Stone) is the CEO of a pharmaceutical conglomerate and a rising star in the business world. That’s why it’s shocking, to her and to us, when she’s kidnapped by Teddy (Jesse Plemons) and his cousin Don (Aidan Delbis). In the basement of Teddy’s mother’s house, Michelle is tied to a chair and has her head shaved. Teddy calmly explains that they know she’s an alien. Not just any alien, but one of the higher-ups tasked with keeping humanity subservient while destroying small communities and the planet itself; specifically, honeybees. Michelle, and the audience, can only look on in disbelief.
But this is a Yorgos Lanthimos film, and a remake of a South Korean original, so the central question isn’t just whether Michelle is an alien. That’s the film’s primary mystery. The secondary, and arguably more unsettling one, is Teddy’s conspiratorial mind. Is he delusional? Is he right? Or is he projecting his very real frustrations with a broken system onto a sci-fi fantasy that gives his suffering meaning? We’re also left wondering how fully Don understands or believes in a plan that grows increasingly violent and dangerous.
“Bugonia” is structured around these uncertainties, offering brief flashes of bleak humor while peeling back Teddy’s mental state and asking whether humanity really needs extraterrestrial villains to explain its own failures. At its core, this is a story about a terrified human watching his world collapse. Teddy’s mother is in a coma. His home is literally rotting. He’s unemployed, isolated, and convinced that nature itself is screaming in pain. The question isn’t just whether aliens are to blame, but it’s whether we’re too narcissistic as a species to accept that we’re sometimes, if not most of the time, the villains of our own story.
Plemons and Stone are exceptional, particularly in scenes where they engage in psychological sparring. Stone plays Michelle with just enough ambiguity to keep us guessing whether she’s a helpless victim, a ruthless capitalist, or an intergalactic executioner ready to end the human experiment. Plemons, meanwhile, brings surprising nuance to Teddy. He’s not framed as a traditional villain, but as a deeply pathetic figure. He’s incapable of reckoning with the world around him and desperate for a narrative that explains his powerlessness.
There’s no shortage of themes in “Bugonia”: environmental collapse, nihilism, conspiracy thinking, capitalism, and humanity’s place in the universe. I found myself viewing the film as a crossroads between our ancient need to believe we matter and the scientific reality that we’re specks of dust in an indifferent cosmos. If you lean into that interpretation, the film may feel bleaker and more sobering than entertaining, but at times that seems intentional.
You could read “Bugonia” as smiling through the apocalypse. I see it more as an invitation to embrace absurdity while staring straight at the fact sheet detailing our future. Either way, it’s a darkly funny, unsettling reminder that the scariest monsters aren’t aliens, they’re the stories we tell ourselves to avoid responsibility.
4K Review
THE BIRTH OF THE BEES: THE MAKING OF BUGONIA: Interviews with the cast and crew.
‘Tarot’ tells the haunting tale of a group of friends who rent out an ancient mansion in order to celebrate a friend’s birthday and in the course of the evening’s festivities uncover a secret room packed with ancient artifacts. After finding an eerily hand-painted deck of tarot cards and convincing their friend to do readings for each of them which violate the sacred tarot rules, the friends start mysteriously dying in gruesome fashion. As the surviving friends attempt to uncover the truth behind the deaths they soon realize that they are being killed off in the manner described in their readings. But stopping the curse will be significantly harder than triggering it, especially if they hope to end it before any more of them perish.
Written and directed by Spenser Cohen & Anna Halberg who each make their feature length directorial debut and do a solid job at the helm of ‘Tarot’ capably guiding along the creepy and violent fun. The film’s cast includes Harriet Slater (Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny), Adain Bradley (Wrong Turn 2021), Avantika (Mean Girls 2024), Wolfgang Novogratz (The Half of It), Humberly González (Slumberland), Larsen Thompson (Bloodline) and Jacob Batalon (Spider-Man: No Way Home) with the majority offering capable or at the very least fitting performances in each of their respective roles.
‘Tarot’ is a fun, over the top and surprisingly bloody teen-centric horror offering that may not be an Oscar contender or a remarkable film by any means, and is often lacking in cleverness and originality but ends up delivering a significantly more enjoyable PG-13 horror film than you might expect. It’s a fairly goofy and silly concept to begin with and it takes the story and twists further than expected, while also delivering some surprisingly violent and bloody deaths that even while they never reach the level of outright gory seem to repeatedly push the boundaries of the rating. Somehow the goofy concept itself helps to make this one as fun as it is by the filmmakers repeatedly going so far with the material while playing it off in a serious manner at the same time; allowing it to almost maintain a tongue-in-cheek style without actually portraying it as such.
The key characters of ‘Tarot’ are fairly basic and it’s difficult to become too attached to most of them, although that only helps to make it even more entertaining when they are killed in one gruesome manner after another, while many of the other characters within seem unable to accept the reality of the situation as others couldn’t be more done with it. It’s a curious approach and I honestly can’t say whether it was intended or not, but it certainly makes for a fairly solid and engaging ride into darkness that genre fans who don’t mind a little bit of cheese (albeit possibly unintentional) should enjoy this one a fair amount, especially if you can go in expecting as much.
Overall, ‘Tarot’ is an entertaining and somewhat over the top supernatural horror film that plays things fairly straight but ends up becoming almost silly at times due to the out there story and reasoning behind the chaos, as well as the bloody and violent ways the characters are eliminated throughout which almost feels reminiscent of a tamed down version of ‘Final Destination’ at times. Even while it may not be intentionally silly and never portrays the events in that way, its serious approach and the almost surprisingly brutal moments end up forming into a slightly above average ride that’s somehow way more enjoyable than it should be. If you’re a fan of similar horror films and are at all interested in ‘Tarot’ then it’s definitely worth giving a chance, although I would encourage first time viewers to rent it before purchasing a copy just to be safe.
The Blu-ray release of ‘Tarot’ features a full 1080p High Definition presentation with the film’s original Aspect Ratio. The video presentation looks tremendous and offers a clean, sharp and richly detailed presentation from start to finish that never suffers from any notable faults or glitches to be uncovered along the way. Detail is sharp and impressive on everything from character faces and clothing to the sprawling mansion and almost everything else appearing onscreen at one point or another, which is all complemented by rewarding black levels that benefit this often very dark film and keep any artifacts or anything else from negatively affecting the darker moments which never disappoint. Overall, this is a great high definition video presentation that holds up wonderfully at all times and shouldn’t disappoint fans or newcomers.
The Blu-ray release features a 5.1 channel DTS-HD Master Audio soundtrack. This multichannel soundtrack makes a splendid complement to the onscreen fun and provides a clean, crisp and frequently aggressive audio presentation throughout. It repeatedly utilizes all five available channels in order to send music, creepy and violent sound effects along with nature elements and plenty more whipping throughout the various speakers whenever appropriate, while never resulting in any dialogue or other audio elements becoming negatively affected or rendered problematic in the process. Overall, this is a fantastic 5.1 DTS-HD MA soundtrack that repeatedly benefits the film and should easily excite viewers.
Conclusion
The Blu-ray release of ‘Tarot’ features a few brief extras. Included on the release are the Behind the Scenes Featurettes ‘A Twist of Fate: Making the Film’ (running approximately 6 minutes in length) and ‘Circle of Friends’ (running approximately 7 minutes) which feature interviews/comments with the cast and crew, plus behind the scenes footage and more. Also included are ‘Killer Outtakes’ from the film (approximately 2 minutes). I had fun with ‘Tarot’ but as aforementioned, it’s not cleverly executed. But sound and picture are absolutely amazing. Incidentally, ‘Tarot’ is presently a major hit on Netflix! Not surprising since it is a good watch with friends.
Starring: Jenna Kanell, Danny Kang and Danielle Lyn
Directed by: Raymond Wood
Rated: NR
Running Time: 83 minutes
Dark Sky Films
Our Score: 3.5 out of 5 Stars
Has horror even been this meta? “Bodies Bodies Bodies,” “X,” “One Cut of the Dead,” and “Totally Killer” are just a few of the meta horror movies from the past couple of years that I can think of off the top of my head. It’s been an interesting subgenre for decades, but it seems to have crescendoed recently. However, have we ever had an actor or actress in a newly beloved horror film take on their own success through the meta medium? After several film festivals, “Terrifier” began making the rounds in 2018. Since then, and thanks to the highly successful sequel, “Terrifier 2,” Art the Clown is slowly becoming a household slasher name and Jenna Kanell’s career has taken off. I’ve seen Kanell once a year in one film or another and she has this dangerous, yet fun magnetism about her. This is basically what “Faceless After Dark” is.
Bowie (Jenna Kanell) is famous after starring in a film where she dukes it out with a sociopathic killer clown. It leads to more horror film offers, conventions on weekends and an internet buzz that seems inescapable. But it isn’t the boost to her career she was expecting. She doesn’t like the convention circuit, she doesn’t like being typecast as the final girl, she doesn’t like the lack of pay, she doesn’t like that her creative ideas and aspirations are ignored and she definitely doesn’t like the daily parade of older, uglier, fatter and hideous men sliding into her DMs. This frustration builds and builds until one night, a person imitating the sociopathic killer clown from Bowie’s famous film enters her home during another frustrating night of writer’s block. However, she may have just found her inspiration.
“Faceless After Dark ” blurs the lines so much between Kanell/Bowie, we’re unsure about quite a lot as the film progresses. We enjoy watching Bowie getting vengeance, but how much of this is entrenched in Kanell’s beliefs and existence within the artist and audience dynamic? There aren’t too many clues during Bowie’s blood rage to mine out a direct interpretation of Kanell’s attitudes. She might actually be a true sociopath if that was the case, but the film does have a very cathartic nature to it. We may not understand the strife on screen, but we understand how social media, the constant negativity it pours into our lives, and the contemporary world around us becomes more and more of a burden the more we allow our lives to bleed into social media. That’s when the mess of the world feels more tangible than other issues in our life that we can actually handle and change. It’s a human breaking point of needing to lash out when the world feels like it’s lashing you daily.
There’s a lot of pondering going on behind Kanell’s eyes, whether it’s while she checks her phone, edits video footage or stares with pure determination into the camera during a strobe light montage of violent imagery. On top of Kanell’s mysteriousness, “Faceless After Dark” makes a few interesting remarks about the slasher genre. The title slasher, whether it be Freddy Krueger, Jason Vorhees or even Art the Clown, always seems to be given the true love and adoration while the love and adoration for final girls like Bowie/Kanell may be at times genuine, but sometimes sexually motivated and overtly creepy. It’s also interesting that many slashers simply kill to kill, sometimes indiscriminately or, as it was stated for years, because they had sex. We still love those male slashes for it. In “Faceless After Dark,” it’s almost like Bowie needs an emotional excuse instead of indiscriminate slashing. Without that linchpin, we risk not liking her. Odd, isn’t it?
“Faceless After Dark” is a suitable slasher, but is way better as the meta slasher it angles to be. If you don’t know Kanell and the “Terrifier” franchise, I doubt you’d understand a lot of the film and I also doubt you’d be interested in this film in the first place. Led by Kanell, who may deserve her own slasher series after this, “Faceless After Dark” is a vicious spectacle that will potentially have genre fans questioning their own fandom and what the film ultimately represents.
“Conjuring old Sepultura and early Slayer vibes, ‘Choking Game’ offers a dark look into the world of mental illness, drug addiction, and depression so often overlooked in today’s society.” — SNAFU
Hardcore thrash/punk unit SNAFU (Situation Normal All Fucked Up) will unleash their Exile//Banishment full-length on March 26th via Life After Death Records.
Spawned from the ruins of Detroit, Michigan, SNAFU self-released their debut full length, Fear The Future, in 2013. Later distributed by Profane Existence, the songs bore a raw punk expression of raging cynicism and the destructive nature of mankind. Further honing their artistry, 2015’s Present Day Plague LP stayed true to their aggressive raw punk roots while working in elements of thrash and grind. Punknews crowned the record, “the soundtrack for the apocalypse.” Glacially Musical concurred, further likening the work to a, “violent trip through a post-apocalyptic landscape of human decadence.”
This year, amidst plague, governmental corruption, and widespread societal suffering, the band spews forth the seething sounds of their third full-length, Exile//Banishment. Tracked and produced by Phil “Landphil” Hall (Municipal Waste, Cannabis Corpse, Iron Reagan etc.) and twin brother Josh “Hallhammer” Hall (Cannabis Corpse) at Blaze Of Torment Studios in Richmond, Virginia, mixed by Adam Shepard, and mastered by Joel Grind (Toxic Holocaust), Exile//Banishment is the band’s heaviest, darkest, and angriest affair yet focusing on personal frustrations and the hopeless future of humanity.
“I’ve been good friends with Phil and Josh for a couple years now,” reveals guitarist/vocalist Scott Curnow. “We’ve gigged with all of their bands multiple times and I sometimes crew for Waste and Iron Regan; we’ve also toured with Cannabis Corpse. Phil has always given me advice and tips on how to help SNAFU to be more successful. So when we were getting ready to record a mutual friend was like, ‘hey, doesn’t Phil and Josh track all of their own bands? You should hit them up,’ and sure enough they were down. It was great having them there. Josh gave a lot of input when it came to the drums and Phil lent some great ideas on guitar parts and some solos. This album has basically been finished since May 2020 and with the pandemic we didn’t really know what to do with it or how to go about releasing it.”
In advance of the release of Exile//Banishment, SNAFU delivers “Choking Game” for public feasting, noting of the track, “Conjuring old Sepultura and early Slayer vibes, ‘Choking Game’ offers a dark look into the world of mental illness, drug addiction, and depression so often overlooked in today’s society.”
The classic heist movie has been a staple genre in
Hollywood for decades. A close-knit team of criminals planning to make off with
the haul of their lives. Sounds familiar, right?
Yet despite the fact that most modern heist films are all
based on this similar premise, that doesn’t make them any less enjoyable. There
are certainly a few films that stand out from the crowd, not to mention
standing the test of time incredibly well. We’ve grouped together three main
categories – the bank heist, the casino heist and the gang heist – and selected
the most honourable mentions within each. Let’s dive straight in.
The Bank
Heist – Reservoir Dogs
A heist movie like no other, it’s easy to forget that
Reservoir Dogs was Quentin Tarantino’s first foray into the world of directing.
In many ways it set the tone for Tarantino’s reputation as an auteur:
unconventional, violent and unique. When you think of the standard heist movie,
you think of three main sections: the plan, the execution and the
aftermath. Reservoir Dogs almost completely does away with the
‘main’ second section, jumping between the events before and after the
heist.
In doing so, we get a completely different take on the
characters involved, their motivations and their allegiances. It’s a film
where, for the most part, the action takes a back seat to the dialogue. We’re
also still
hoping for that Vega Brothers movie that’s long been talked about.
The
Casino Heist – Ocean’s Eleven
Arguably the film that sparked the entire heist movie
trend, Ocean’s Eleven was an immediate sensation upon its release back in
1960. Of course, the younger among us may be more familiar with the 2001
remake, starring the likes of George Clooney, Brad Pitt and Matt Damon.
The remake stands on its own as a modern classic, transporting us back to the
glitz and glamour of the Las Vegas Strip. We get a more in-depth look at the
way modern casinos operate, specifically the Bellagio, The Mirage and the MGM Grand.
It’s hard to find a more thrilling setting than that.
More recently, the legacy of the Ocean’s series has even reached beyond the silver screen into the rapidly evolving world of iGaming, with sites offering a range of heist-inspired games that draw on elements from Ocean’s Eleven, perfect for any film fan looking to get a taste of the casino heist thrill for themselves.
The Gang
Heist – Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels
Another debut film from one of the most important British directors of the past few decades, Guy Ritchie. The film helped launch the careers of the likes of Jason Statham and Vinnie Jones, not to mention Ritchie himself. Interesting to think that it might not have been made if it wasn’t for a little help from Tom Cruise.
Loaded with unforgettable characters and a great
soundtrack, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels follows the path of a group of
young schemers on a mission to repay the £100,000 they lost to an East
London card-shark. It’s one of those films that leaves the audience
wondering just who will come out on top.
So, there we have it, three top movies from three main
genres of heist film. We’d be tempted to say we’ve seen it all, but the
evolving nature of the heist movie probably means there’s much more to come.
Starring: Charlie Hunnam, Astrid Berges-Frisbey and Jude Law
Directed By: Guy Ritchie
Rated: PG-13
Running Time: 126 minutes
Warner Bros. Pictures
Our Score: 2 out of 5 Stars
For those who’ve read, studied, or are even fans of Arthurian legend, “King Arthur: Legend of the Sword” isn’t for you. In fact, if you’re well versed in the British folklore, your confusion will quickly turn into anger a couple of minutes into the movie. While I’m not concerned about the mythology-to-book legitimacy of Guy Ritchie’s film, I’m more concerned about the emotional disconnect between its characters and the film’s unrepentant amount of murder.
Arthur (Hunnam), is born into royalty in Camelot, but not raised by his parents. His power hungry uncle, Vortigern (Law), murders his mom and dad, leaving Arthur orphaned and stranded in a boat. He’s picked up by some ladies of the night in Londinium, raised to become a compassionate and strong warrior. Arthur lives life ignorant to his royal and legendary bloodline, but he’s quickly thrust back into the bizarre world that he was born in. A sword in a stone has appeared and there are rumblings amongst the peasants about the return of England’s true king.
Anyone whose familiar with the works of authors like Geoffery of Monmouth and T.H. White, is surely wondering what the hell is going on with their beloved story. Guy Ritchie has pieced together one of the most disjointed and confounding action movies of the year. It’s really difficult to pinpoint blame on this one, but when he’s in the director’s chair and credited as one of the writers, the blame should fall at his feet.
Hunnam, is charming enough, but much of his allure feels forced. Maybe it’s because he’s much better suited as a tragic hero, which he played for six years on “Sons of Anarchy.” Law can’t suit up and play a compelling villain, and his character is inept and underdeveloped. Vortigern spends most of his time making empty threats and talking to an unnamed octopus woman in the dungeon of Camelot. By the way, the live-action Ursula gone-wrong, is just one of many unnamed and unexplained things, places, and people populating Ritchie’s vision.
Recognizable names, like Sir Lancelot or Sir Galahad, are on short supply as most run-of-the-mill fans will be struggling to remember or relate with characters like Back Lack or Mischief John. Merlin is mentioned, but the only mage Arthur ever comes into contact with is played by Astrid Berges-Frisbey. She’s never named in the movie, in the credits, or on the movie’s IMDB, yet she’s the only person of magic to interact with Arthur and help him tame his sword. You’d think an integral component of your plot would at least have a nickname.
There are inspired moments of “King Arthur,” but that’s only because of Ritchie’s visual flair and when his signature style is deployed, the use of narration over action sequences to condense exposition in an entertaining manner. The action is mostly digital; including a finale that feels like it was created with the video game engine from “Dark Souls.” It must be noted that this movie is excessively violent as we watch anonymous and unnamed civilians, usually helpless women, slaughtered. It makes the specific Arthur subplot that he lacks motivation to become king and save the day especially confounding.
If you were to take away the legend of King Arthur, as the film’s backdrop, it’s not an especially unique action film. It’s a mish mash of multi-national war dramas, “Lord of the Rings” and slow-motion CGI battles. While there’s rarely a dull moment, that void is filled with plenty of stupid moments. It may find an audience amongst connoisseurs and lovers of bad cinema; much like “Gods of Egypt” did last year.
“King Arthur” is certainly an attempt to kick start a franchise for Warner Bros., who’s still unwilling to admit their regret for hiring Zack Snyder to put together the DC universe. There was potential for “King Arthur” because Ritchie was in the pilot’s seat, but his talents are overwhelmed by a messy script, bland characters, dimly lit settings, and an over indulgence in summer blockbuster movie tropes. If there’s a sequel, I’ll hope for the best, but expect the worst.
Starring: Gemma Arterton, Glenn Close and Sennia Nanua
Directed By: Colm McCarthy
Rated: R
Running Time: 111 minutes
Saban Films
Our Score: 4 out of 5 Stars
If it bites like a zombie, moves like a zombie, and growls like a zombie, it’s probably a zombie. That’s not the case though in “The Girl with All the Gifts.” Their zombies haven’t necessarily died and become reanimated monsters that crave human flesh and/or brains. Instead, a fungal infection is the culprit behind the mindless, violent masses stalking this post-apocalyptic world. The spores sprout and creep into the brain, like a vine weaving its way into a home’s foundation, causing a human to lose their mental prowess and become monotonous cannibals.
While the sight of a human would usually send a stereotypical film zombie into a tizzy, the zombies in “The Girl with All the Gifts” only react to scent and sound. Also in this dystopian future, where the last remaining humans have stowed away in heavily guarded forts, there’s a third, hybrid group that co-exists. It’s made up of second-generation children, born from a human turned zombie. They’re almost like a bridge between the two, exhibiting human emotions and intellect, but excited to sink their teeth into flesh and organs at a moment’s notice.
The elementary and middle-school aged children keep their inhibitions in check, but just the mere whiff of someone’s stench sends them chomping at flesh, snarling at people and attempting to escape their restraints. The most intelligent and articulate of the group is Melanie (Nanua). She’s also the best at keeping her animalistic urges in check while her entire class acts like starved sharks when a drop of blood hits the water.
Most everyone at the military base, whether its army men with assault rifles, apprehensive school teachers or scientists, is petrified of the children; except two people. Miss Helen (Arterton) sees humanity’s salvation in them. While Miss Helen may pine for the days before the apocalypse, she thinks that these kids are more than just a potential cure, but have true value in shaping the future of the world. Dr. Caldwell (Close) on the other hand picks the brains of the children, literally and intellectually.
“The Girl with All the Gifts” is based on a book of the same, where the writer most likely stole a few pages out of “The Walking Dead” playbook, incorporating emotion, character study, and morality into the zombie genre. Video gamers will get more of a Deja vu feeling as the fungal infection and foliage rich cities feel reminiscent of the PlayStation 3 game, “The Last of Us.” Despite some of the clear and possible influences, “The Girl with All the Gifts” avoids a lot of cliché pitfalls and is a solid addition to the zombie genre that’s been struggling to find anything fresh lately
Even with the star power of Glenn Close, the movie is led by the heartfelt, yet terrifying, performance of a 12-year-old actress. Sennia Nanua counterbalances the dire outlook in “The Girl With all the Gifts” with a curious coming-of-age story. If Melanie didn’t have dried blood on her lips and face half the time, she could be the Katniss of the zombie world. Melanie faces a lot of stark realizations about the real world as the movie progresses. Her adolescent transformation is quick, nuanced and captivating.
Melanie’s fresh grasp of the world, past, present and future, is integral, but it’s her relationships with Miss Helen and Dr. Caldwell that set-up a profound third act. It takes a while to get to the crux of it because the story meanders, but during that downtime, there are some solid moments. It’s there we find out about how the human mind and spirit can overcome carnal urges. It helps the audience better understand the painfully tragic choices we have to make when reality stares us down in the face.
The outcome will most likely be viewed as grim, but it’s important to keep in mind the lessons that Melanie picks up along the way. It’s interesting to watch a genre, generally rich with fear and cynicism, find a more impactful message about humanity’s selfish existence and fear of nature. “The Girl with All the Gifts” adds some intelligence to the brain dead genre by being more sensitive and curious about the human story developing on screen than it is with making the audience jump in their seats.
Eat The Turnbuckle is a heavy metal band hailing from Philadelphia, PA. Despite being from “The City of Brotherly Love” the groups sound and stage show which features elements of extreme wrestling couldn’t be further from the cities well know moniker. The band recently released a new EP titled “The Great American Head Bash In” and Media Mikes had the chance to speak with the bands vocalist Jag 13 to discuss the new EP, the group’s intense stage shows and their plans for the remainder of 2016.
Adam Lawton: Is Eat the Turnbuckle a band who wrestles or, wrestler that play in a band?
Jag 13: It’s kind of both honestly. Some of the older guys in the band used to wrestle and Shlak one of our guitarists wrestles now for CZW. For me personally I have always been into both wrestling and music. Philadelphia has always been a great town for wrestling and when I was younger I remember the WWF coming through a lot. I got to see the whole ECW thing come into play as well. With music I think that’s something almost everyone gets in to at a young age so I have been in to both for as long as I can remember.
AL: What can you tell us about the bands most recent EP?
Jag 13: We did “The Great American Bash Your Head In” for our most recent tour. We try and have new material out each time we go on the road. If we know we are going to be heading out at a certain time we start writing and putting things together. This EP has 5 new songs which have been going over really well so far. We only did one show here in the states on this run with the rest of the dates being over in Europe. We did about 22 shows over there and wrapped things up with our performance at this year’s Gwar B-Q inn Virginia. We were actually supposed to do one other show however we had to cancel due to our drummer having a broken ankle. He actually broke it the second day of tour and finally went to the hospital on the fourth day of the tour. He had a cast on but didn’t miss one show. Like a dummy he took the cast off when we got back home and things got messed up even worse.(Laughs)
AL: Speaking of the Gwar B-Q. This was the second time you guys have been asked to play. How did this year’s event differ from the previous year you performed?
Jag 13: The first time we played they had us going on pretty early. Something happened with the doors and we ended up playing to a small group as a lot of people were stuck at the gates. I think the reception from those who saw was really good and the fact that a lot of people who wanted to see us couldn’t helped with us getting asked back this year. This year was off the hook! We played the Slutman Pavilion which was a lot of fun. I think I would prefer playing that stage over one of the bigger stages. We have sort of gotten used to playing on smaller stages but even if we were on the bigger stage things would have definitely spilled over. (Laughs) A bigger stage means we have to do bigger gimmicks!
AL: With your show incorporating extreme/hardcore wrestling elements and references what was the European reception like being that type of wrestling isn’t as common there?
Jag 13: I think those things were why we have caught on so well over there. They don’t have the hardcore and extreme matches in their wrestling shows so this is something new for them. We had people coming up to us after the shows who weren’t fans of the music but they came out to check out the wrestling. We played a lot of smaller countries over there and those people just ate it up. They loved watching the shows. We did a festival in the Czech Republic where they actually got a wring for us. Shlak ended up wrestling the Champ from the league there in a death match. It was in front of about five thousand people and it was just crazy. Both the guys needed to get stitched up afterwards.
AL: What type of planning goes into one of your shows being that not only are you performing musically but you are also including wrestling elements as well?
Jag 13: We argue a lot. (Laughs) Right before the show we sort of get the lay of the land and plan out what we are going to do. At the same time we have work with the venue to make sure we know what we can and can’t do. Like when we did the Gwar B-Q you can’t have any glass. Every show is a little different so we have to just go with the flow. People have been really accommodating. We have all been in bands that have crazy stage shows. That’s how we all came together. Philadelphia has a history of violent shows so we sort of just fit in to that. When things started to get a little more PC within the scene myself and Shlak started gathering guys who still wanted something crazy.
AL: Do you ever feel that the graphic nature of your shows limits your audience?
Jag 13: We have had shows cancelled due to people finding out about our shows and in turn not wanting anything to do with it. At this point I have become so used to that type of thing that it doesn’t bother me. If they don’t want us, they don’t want us. We have a pretty good booking agent who lets all the places know what type of show we put on. Some of the show we have done in the past we just showed up and started going at it. (Laughs) That tended not to work out real well for any one.
AL: With your drumming being laid up with an injury does that end the year for you or do you still have things plans?
Jag 13: We don’t have anything planned until October then after that we don’t anything planned until spring time of next year. We have some bids in on tours that we think will work well for us here in the states so we have our fingers crossed.
Starring: Manish Dayal, Helen Mirren, Om Puri and Charlotte Le Bon
Directed By: Lasse Hallstrom
Rated: PG
Running Time: 122 minutes
Walt Disney Studios
Our Score: 3 out of 5 stars
In a summer that’s already been delighted by Jon Favreau’s “Chef”, it’s hard to be charmed once again by the same feel good concept featuring an abundance of food porn imagery. “Hundred-Foot Journey” is definitely treading in paths already traveled, but as we begin to exhaust what’s left of new summer movies, it’s hard to dislike something that tries to be so uplifting.
While the advertising for this movie has gladly slapped Helen Mirren’s face on every single promotional inch of poster, the real main dish to this movie is Manish Dayal. He plays the shy, yet astute Hassan who seems to have a natural curiosity for food from a very young age. He learns quickly from his mother that food is more art than science, although much later in the movie he’s somewhat forced to believe the opposite. Her spiritual connection to food is some of the best writing in the film, but sadly it’s short lived. An unexplained, violent revolution leads to the death of his mother. Escaping what I can only assume is persecution or certain death, he and his family trek towards colder and more northwestern territories.
Britain’s a bit too cold for their liking so they quickly relocate to one the lushest parts of France. They must have found the one town in France where residents aren’t buried into their smartphone screens since everyone chats over tea and coffee and take in Mother Nature’s surroundings. I legitimately had no idea what time period it was until someone pulled out a cell phone. While in town, his father (Puri), through some odd non-visible premonition, decides that their family will open a restaurant across the street (100 feet) from a much celebrated French restaurant. Something about that dust covered building enchants him, much to the dismay of the French restaurants proprietor, Madame Mallory (Mirren). So begins a choppy and misguided rest of the movie that never replicates the exquisite flare that we see in different spicy dishes throughout the film.
The main problem with “The Hundred-Foot Journey” is it’s glaring predictability that knows how to throw out a hook, but forgets to attach any bait. A simple mislead here or there would have added a level of uncertainty to everything that transpires. Even once we meet Marguerite (Le Bon), one of the lovely young cooks in Mallory’s restaurant, we know she’s the obligatory love interest. After two hours, this movie outstays its welcome like an uninvited dinner guest.
Obvious dramedy clichés aside, it’s still very heartfelt with its material and I have to admire a passionate group of actors and actresses who are willing to add a little zest to a dry story. While I wasn’t quite wooed by some of its more comedic moments, I did enjoy some of the cultural clashes, no matter how false they were. Despite my negatives I have to reassure myself that not everything has to break new ground and it’s always beneficial to have some optimistic escapism in your life.
While I may not have the acquired taste to sit in an air conditioned theater and enjoy this movie to its fullest, I can see why others would need this much needed break. If you’re tired of superheroes, raunchy comedies and looking for a peaceful way to wind down in front a movie screen, “The Hundred-Foot Journey” is your best bet…unless “Chef” is still playing near you.
Starring: Pat Healy, Sara Paxton and David Koechner
Directed By: E.L. Katz
Rated: R
Running Time: 85 minutes
Drafthouse Films
Our Score: 3.5 out of 5 stars
I don’t know about you, but the most I’ve spent on a bottle of liquor is $35 and that was on sale. Imagine spending $300 for a bottle of tequila and silencing the waitress’ doubts that you can afford it by flipping out five Benjamins with a quick flip from your pocket (tip included). That’s exactly the kind of money Colin (Koechner) has to spend and that’s barely a drop in the bucket to his unforeseen amounts of wealth.
Our story isn’t about Colin, it’s about Craig (Healy). Despite being in a happy marriage, Craig is quickly and quietly down on his luck. As soon as he steps outside his apartment, he finds an eviction notice on his door. Even as he arrives to his job as a grease monkey, his boss calmly tells him that the company is downsizing and his name was on the chopping block. Instead of going home and telling his wife that he’s now unemployed and they will soon be out on the street, he decides a night at the bar with his friend Vince (Ethan Embry) would be better. That’s when they meet Colin and his wife Violet (Paxton). They’re celebrating her birthday by making $50 bets and soon want to include them in on the fun.
What kind of fun? Colin tells Craig and Vince that the first one to get the depressed looking female at the bar to slap them across the face, gets $200. Vince is game, but Craig is not. On to a strip club where one of them can now go slap a stripper’s rear end for a couple hundred. Vince is game, but Craig is still not. When they’re chased out, Craig is the one who is picked up by the scruff of his shirt by a bouncer and asked if he’s the one who touched the stripper. Colin in the heat of the moment says, “I’ll give you $500 if you hit him first.” After a night of watching a total stranger shell out money like a deranged Secret Santa and seeing his buddy cheerfully take every bet and make his wallet fatter, Colin gives in. He’s not the strongest looking guy so his meager punch is quickly responded with one knockout blow from our beefcake security guard.
As the night progresses, so does the severity and corrupt nature of the bets, but as the money stakes progress, Colin and Vince can’t help but become competitive. As Craig points out in the movie, we’ve already seen hundreds, if not thousands compete in degrading reality TV competitions, that sometimes involve the consumption of horse genitalia, for the almighty dollar. We also can’t forget that history has taught us that men have done worse for far less. Craig and Violet are a couple that Marquis de Sade would have idolized and wished he had written about. While Violet is the obvious reciprocator of watching these increasingly lewd, sexual, violent acts that Colin and Vince do, Craig is the cuckold husband who is the financial means to an end. Although the narrative is lacking and depraved set-ups are sometimes wasted, this is still a devilishly fun watch.
“Cheap Thrills” shows how insane our characters are willing to go for a quick buck while silently whispering in the audiences ear, “How far would you go?” Our society still divides itself over what is morally right and wrong for some easy cash. Companies will still cut safety corners to save a dime while people will gladly lineup for the next season of bug eating or starvation on “Survivor”. So I ask myself…would I punch the bouncer of a strip club in the face for $500 with the repercussion being a solid blow to my own? Make it $2,000 to help cover the cost of potentially losing my dental crown and you got yourself a deal.
NOW PLAYING EXCLUSIVELY AT AN ALAMO DRAFTHOUSE THEATRE NEAR YOU!
