Wolfman: The Dark Universe Takes Another Blow

The domestic abuser shared universe is added to.

It is odd now that in two film based on classic Universal monsters that there has been an undercurrent of domestic abuse, if they make a Frankenstein film where he attacks the Bride then it will be even more deliberate.

The ideas behind this film are so played out and trite that you consider if it was written by AI bringing back other werewolf films, the werewolf does not want to harm his family yet is ultimately a threat to them, cue cringe metaphors about inner conflict.

Julia Garner was okay on Ozarks but she really doesn’t suit the role she is cast in here, the idea of her as a mother is a little silly, she also has next to no on screen chemistry with Chrisopher Abbot. Seeing their happy family scenes at the beginning which presages almost all Blumhouse films comes across as two people who are strangers to each but who are trying to pretend to be in a relationship.

The werewolf form also looks awful, but I won’t spoil it too much for you

Overall, a flop for Blumhouse to start the year off right

1.5/5

Pros.

It is watchable

It is not the worst thing Blumhouse has ever made

Cons.

The transformation and werewolf form

Garner

The writing

The lack of chemistry

If you enjoyed this review, then please head over to my Patreon to support me, I offer personalized shoutouts, customised film recommendations to suit your personality and tastes, the ability for you to pick what I review next and full access to my Patreon exclusive game reviews. Check it out!

https://www.patreon.com/c/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Or if you would rather send me a donation if Patreon isn’t for you then please find a link to my donations page below

Help Support My Reviews

The Loch Ness Horror: Why Do Even Our Straight To Streaming Movies Need Americans In Them

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Whilst exploring Loch Ness a submarine comes into some trouble.

Yes you heard that right folks there’s a submarine in Loch Ness a closed body of water that has limited access ways to the wider sea or the coast, clearly it was airlifted in.

This film is a cross between a student film under very very very low budget indie, at times the production values are so incredibly cheap that you question if the whole thing is not just some AI experiment. There are exterior shots of the ship that goes to rescue the submarine that quite clearly aren’t real.

The acting if one could call it that, reminds me of the sort of acting you might see out of an nepo child after their daddy has paid their way into the film. You have a mixture of can’t do an accent, won’t do an accent, and a few scatterings of Americans thrown in there because they can’t get any work back in the States.

As someone who has been to Loch Ness I don’t understand why this film couldn’t even use shots of the location, were they too poor to afford it, did the location say no? Who knows, but one thing I can say for sure is that this film knows nothing about the lore of the Loch Ness Monster, and just stitches together some bad monster movie cliches in order to have something barely resembles a coherent storyline.

Overall, why did I watch this, why did people make this, why did this need to exist, all of these and more are more entertaining questions than anything this film can put forward.

1/5

Pros.

It is short

Cons.

It is not even in so bad it is good territory

It looks cheap

It knows nothing of the creature and its lore

It is dumb

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Or if you would rather send me a donation if Patreon isn’t for you then please find a link to my donations page below

Help Support My Reviews

Ruby Gillman Teenage Kracken: The Tik Tok Generation Through The Lens Of Complete Misunderstanding

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Some creatives from DreamWorks who are all probably approaching middle age decide that they know what kids like based of watching one Tik Tok video once and so make this a film that speaks to only one group of people.

This film is made for terminally online teens the kind you would find with dyed hair and who have a series of different flags and causes in their bio, that is what this film thinks teens are. It cannot and will not understand that teens are more than just this crowd. If you need to see proof of my claims then see Ruby’s group of friends and how they talk and interact it is the most cringe thing you will ever see and feels in no way real or even human, maybe that was the point.

The message of be yourself has been told so many times that I question if it has any meaning anymore, surely kids don’t need to be told this lesson by every animated film that comes out every year in order to learn individualism surely they aren’t that dumb.

I struggled to care about any of the characters as I found them clawing stereotypes of what people view Gen Z and Millennials like, and in that sense I just found them more and more irritating as the film went on to such a point where I debated turning it off a few times and if I hadn’t been watching it for review I probably would have.

Overall, this is what happens when 40-50 year olds try to write something for kids they don’t understand.

1.5/5

Pros.

It is a neat concept

It had about two funny jokes

Cons.

It is cringe

It is mostly painfully unfunny

The characters are awful

It feels like a bargain basement version of Turning Red

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

The Last Voyage Of The Demeter: Dracula’s Untold Journey

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

The untold story of Dracula’s voyage to the UK.

I was looking forward to this film for a while, and in my opinion this film got a really unfair roll of the dice. Again it was a shame what happened to the production company but it really undercut this film’s ability to really find an audience. However, it did reach me, and I will be its cheerleader.

Yes in a sense this is a creature feature in the way you would expect, that is not a compliment, in that it is a group of people getting picked off by a monster one by one, but I found that outside of this the film did enough to lift up its fairly generic premise. Chiefly, this film does a good job at establishing atmosphere and making the confines of the ship feel even more claustrophobic then they otherwise would. On top of this when you do see Dracula, particularly at the end, the creature effects look well done and distinctive.

Overall, the best Dracula film in a while

4/5

Pros.

The atmosphere

The creature design

The scares

The pacing

Cons.

The acting is a little patchy at times

If you enjoyed this review, then please head over to my Patreon to support me, I offer personalized shoutouts, the ability for you to pick what I review next, bespoke film recommendation to fit you as a person and full access to my Patreon exclusive game reviews. Check it out!

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

The Boogeyman: Clearly This Film Didn’t Have The Budget To Spring For Any Kind Of Lighting

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A family is plunged into a fight for survival after a supernatural evil takes over their home following the death of their matriarch.

The director behind Host and Dashcam made this film, two of the strongest horror films in recent memory, my, my what a step back.

This feels like the most bland form of studio horror, entirely by the book and with nothing new to surprise you. The metaphor of the film is ham-fistedly done and stands in a poor contrast to other films that try and reflect grief through a supernatural entity, see The Babadook. If you have been paying attention to the genre space recently you will see scares from Smile and Barbarian repeated here sans the punch they had in those films.

The monster is well designed and does look genuinely menacing at times and that is one of the few positives I can give this film. However, despite this good design you will rarely ever see the monster because the film is so dark that you can barely see what is going on most of the time. If you want to get incredibly drunk play a drinking game for every time a character in this film enters a room and doesn’t put a light on, or every time in the middle of the day everything feels like it is on half brightness. I understand this film may have been made on the cheap and as such not have the budget to be showing off a CGI monster at every turn, but the level of darkness in this film is just ridiculous.

Moreover, in terms of performances the central family are serviceable, Yellowjackets’ own Sophie Thatcher steals the show in a number of scenes, but she doesn’t have much to compete with. The film has pretty much all the characters outside of the main family be dislikeable, I don’t know why. They even try and force in some mean girl stuff towards the end that just feels like the most cliché pap and makes you roll your eyes hard.

Lastly, there is something so depressing about this film that at times it makes it unpleasant to watch. I understand the irony of saying that about a horror film but I would argue that plenty of horror films cover depressing and dark topics without making the viewing experience feel depressing. Take Hereditary for example a little girl dies fairly early on and a family descends into hell, but at the same time it is still a fun and thrilling viewing experience you don’t leave the film sad, or at least I didn’t, the same can’t be said for this film.

Overall, a disappointment.

2/5

Pros.

The monster, when you see it

Thatcher

Cons.

It is too dark both literally and figuratively

All of the non-family character are immensely dislikeable/ they force in some teen drama for no good reason

It has horrible pacing issues

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Cocaine Bear: Animal Abuse?

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A bear does cocaine.

I had very low expectations going into this and to be frank with you it met them.

Now this isn’t the worst film I have ever seen by any means it was just incredibly dull and forgettable. If you compare it to another recent creature feature like Crawl or Beast then this film looks far worse by comparison.

The main reason for this is that the film doesn’t know what it wants to be between a goofy comedy and a grizzly creature feature. The tone is all over the place in one frame you will have the characters saying something dumb and goofy and then in the next the bear will be tearing off one of their arms, these two tones don’t go together well. There is no sense of tension or danger because the comedy ruins any chance of it and likewise the overly serious bear scenes take away from any kind of goofy charm the film could have.

Additionally, the characters are written to be so forgettable and shallow that really all they become is bear chow and the film wants you to see them that way not as people. I would say that Keri Russell and O’Shea Jackson Jr are trying to prop this film up with their sheer magnetisms alone but they are both clearly struggling to hold this film together. The Florida Project’s Brooklyn Prince has a strong showing as well but sadly the film just forgets about her for most of its runtime.

Overall, incredibly by the numbers but hey at least it isn’t as bad as Elizabeth Bank’s last directorial effort.

2.5/5

Pros.

It is better than Charlie’s Angels a small mercy

It is watchable

Russell and Jackson Jr are doing their best

Cons.

The tone is all wrong

A lot of the cast are wasted

The pacing is harsh even at a relatively short runtime

If you enjoyed this review, then please head over to my Patreon to support me, I offer personalized shoutouts, the ability for you to pick what I review next and full access to my Patreon exclusive game reviews. Check it out!

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Troll: A Very Norwegian Kaiju

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

An unearthed Troll begins to cause havoc in Norway.

In many senses this is a monster movie, or perhaps even a kaiju movie, it is about a big creature going around wrecking things and causing lots of damage and then humans having to come up with a way to stop it. Maybe that is what I should have expected, but I was thinking this was going to follow more in line with something like Troll Hunter and be about Trolls and explore the Troll legends of Scandinavia, but not have it devolve into CGI destruction. I was disappointed with what I got in the end.

Moreover, this film is in a sense also quite comedic and I don’t really understand whether that was on purpose or entirely unintentional, as the film takes itself very seriously but every now and again there will be a line that is very silly and that you can’t help but laugh at, it is quite odd.

Additionally, I found the CGI of this film to be quite distracting for all the wrong reasons. Now I am not going to go after the film too harshly for this as though it has some Netflix money, it isn’t like it has a Hollywood style budget so a little shoddiness in the CGI department is to be expected, but this film really takes the cake. It frequently shows it’s CGI Troll and my word does it look fake and jarringly so.

Overall, another dumb monster rampage movie with sub-optimal CGI.

2.5/5

Pros.

It is watchable

It has an interesting premise

It is funny but I don’t know if that is intentional

Cons.

The oddness in humour and tone

The lackings in the CGI

It is dumb and squanders its premise

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Maneater: Making Sharknado Look Like An Oscar Worthy Affair

1/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A shark movie featuring the worst shark effects you will ever see in your life, even the clearly fake looking shark in Jaws from the 70s is better than this.

I will open this review by saying that I am a big Shane West fan, I grew up watching Nikita and later Salem and as such I will always turn up for something starring, or in this case co-starring West. However, though he may be the reason this film gets a 1 and not less, he certainly isn’t enough to make this film even barely watchable.

The shark attack/survival subgenre of horror is already incredibly overpopulated as such it is very hard for a shark film to be good or to standout, for positive reasons, from the rest. This film did stand out but for all the wrong reasons. Obviously as I have previously mentioned the incredibly poor effects on the shark that are almost laughably bad is the main reason, however also bad is the fact that this film looks like a made for TV Sharknado esque affair, but it doesn’t bring the tongue in cheek tone or charm of that film and instead decides to play it straight for the most part- to no one’s benefit.

I also really don’t care for the narrative structure of this film and how it decides to split focus between the main group of partiers under attack by the shark and then a grieving father, played by Trace Adkins, as he decides to hunt down the shark. I suppose the two threads to coreless in the end, but until this point it is a jarring back and forth between them.

Our lead of Jessie, played by Nicky Whelan, is aggressively average. She brings very little to the table beyond being a damsel in distress that doesn’t even really get any good licks in on the shark, instead needing to wait for the uber macho Harlan, Adkins, to come and save her. Something I will give this film credit for is the fact that it uses a cast of older actors rather than have it just be the genre’s standard collection of teens.

Overall, how not to do a Shark movie.

Pros.

Casting older actors

Shane West is trying his best

Cons.

The shark frequently looks terrible

It is boring and cliched

It is on for far too long

The lead performance is fairly reductive

!https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

The Sea Beast: An Underwater How To Train Your Dragon

3.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

In a world of Hunters and Sea Beasts, the two sides finally realise that the real evil in the world are corrupt monarchies that pit them against each other.

I thought that this was one of the best Netflix originals that I have seen in some time. I enjoyed the world and the characters tremendously and thought that it had a lot to say about life and about the current state of our own world. I also enjoyed the fact that every time Karl Urban spoke he reminded me of his character from The Boys, the accents are basically the same, that gave me some happy flashbacks.

The film as a whole has a strong How To Train Your Dragon’s vibe, with some plot elements feeling almost beat for beat the same. However, where in other instances I would lambast this film for its lack of creativity and originality I actually like the elements here on display despite the fact they are so obviously copied over. I thought that the sea beast that we meet are all quite memorable and cute looking; Netflix really should start selling more merch from their films and shows.

My issues with the film mainly come from a pacing perspective as I think this film could do with being about twenty minutes shorter as there is a lot of needless bloat wherein not much happens around the second act, which could be removed to the film’s betterment.

Overall, fun but not perfect.

Pros.

The ending

The sea beasts themselves

It is a lot of fun

Urban

Cons.

The pacing

It is very familiar

It doesn’t service all its characters and a lot of them remain undeveloped

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Piranha 3DD: How Many Sex Jokes Does It Take To Be Funny? This Film Never Found Out

1/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A film about objectifying women and then watching evil fish rip them apart.

Just from looking at a poster you know that this film knows who it is playing to…. Horny people going to get their titillation at the cinema, as well as those of us whose guilty pleasure is schlocky B movie esque horror. Both of whom will be slightly let down by this film.

In many ways this film tries to be tongue in cheek with its vulgar voyeuristic side, but struggles often to make its creepy camera angles feel in any way like self-satire or parody. In this vein the film is awash with poor female representation, despite having a female lead in Danielle Panabaker, it’s female characters are mostly given stereotypical roles and are ranked in importance under how they look more so than anything else.

Panabaker’s involvement with this is disappointing as she has proven from her other roles that she is a really talented actor, so here it feels as though she is slumming it. Yes, maybe she just wanted the cash, but it still saddens me to see her brought low like this.

Overall, self-referencing your own perviness does not somehow make it less bad.

Pros.

Some B movie esque charm to be found if you look deep enough.

Cons.

The poor female representation

It does nothing to distinguish itself from its predecessor

Panabaker deserves better

It has pacing issues

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer