Slasher Horror: The Genre That Refuses To Die

A ‘Slasher’ film for those of you who don’t know is a type of horror film usually focusing on a group of people, in most cases teens, who are hunted down one by and one and killed. Sometimes this can be done with the standard escaped lunatic trope, Halloween the original, or sometimes the killer can have more of a supernatural bend, like Freddy from the Nightmare on Elm Street series.

The Slasher sub-genre has been around in one form or another for decades, stretching all the way back to the 1960 release of Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho. The film’s villain, Norman Bates, is the first example we see of what would become the horror staple slasher. Following on from this we had the release of Black Christmas, which is getting a 2019 remake, and the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, both released in 1974; this kicked the sub-genre off, and proved that these sort of films was where the horror was heading.

The film that would go on to solidify the identity of what a Slasher film can and can’t be, as well as bring about the trope of the ‘Final Girl’, was John Carpenters Halloween; this is seen as the first of the modern slashers and would become the template for what other horror movies and franchises would do down the line.

The 80s were the prime time for Slasher horror, with the release of Friday the 13th at the end of the 70s going into the 80s as well as more from the Halloween franchise, and a little film called Nightmare on Elm Street. All of these films put their spin on the slasher formula, with the 1980s release of Child’s Play being the most novel making the evil slasher a doll. However, franchise fatigue was beginning to set in.

Over the 1980s the market had become saturated with Slasher horror and audiences were starting to get sick of it. The big franchises had become more and more silly, as a way to try and keep the concept new and exciting; here’s looking at you Friday the 13th. As such, when the 1990s rolled around, a film was released which exposed as well as poked fun at all of the sub-genres rules and tropes; this film was Wes Craven’s Scream.

Scream was released to massive applause and praise, with it almost being a parody, but still remaining scary, and most importantly innovative. The release of Scream helped to breath new life into the Slasher genre, but this was only short-lived. With more schlocky slasher films like Wrong Turn and Hatchet being made in this brief window, but all of this was not enough to save the genre; as we reached the end of the 90s, the Slasher horror was on its way out. Another contributing factor in this decline was the late 90s release of The Blair Witch Project, which pushed horror cinema in a completely different direction, found footage.

Throughout the 2000s the big Slasher franchises continued to release films, whether reboots or, sequels no one asked for and a lot of them came out to minimal fanfare and even fewer ticket sales. All hope for Slasher movies coming back to the forefront of horror cinema seemed lost. Then the news was announced that Danny McBride, know for his comedy roles, wanted to write a new entry for the Halloween series, this film would ignore all the terrible sequels that followed the original; when the movie came out it was met with praise at every turn and made a large amount of money for the studio; naturally two sequels to this film were announced thereafter. Now at the time of writing there is talk of a new Friday the 13th film as well as a Nightmare on Elm Street film, and though there still are terrible Slasher movie sequels being released, 2019’s Child’s Play and the Leatherface origin story, the Slasher genre still has one last gasp in its lungs and, one last scare to give.

Hustlers: Proof Jennifer Lopez can act!

Hustlers is a 2019 crime thriller film, about a group of strippers that after the 2008 financial crisis decide to start drugging and robbing their clients to make some extra cash; apparently based on real events.

First things first, the film is handled tastefully, others who have reviewed it says it shows life as a stripper accurately, rather than overly glamorising it; which some movies do. At no point did the film become vulgar, or pervy; which is something that this film if done differently, could have been in danger of.

The main plot of the film revolves around Destiny, (Constance Wu), as a new girl in this particular strip club, who needs to make some money to pay for her grandmother’s debts. Enter Ramona, (Jennifer Lopez), a seasoned pro who knows how to make money and get what she wants. What then follows is a dive into the extreme as the girl’s actions become more and more sinister, and Ramona and Destiny become more and more at odds. On the whole, the film’s plot is quite novel as there haven’t been many crime films from the woman’s point of view.

Hustlers is Jennifer Lopez’s movie, as though she isn’t the main character, she is the most interesting and compelling. Lopez gives a hell of a performance and can switch between a caring mother and friend, to someone who will do whatever it takes to get what she wants. There has been talk comparing Lopez’s role in this to Matthew McConaughey’s character in Magic Mike, and if this is true than Hustlers might mark the beginning of a renaissance in Lopez’s acting career; she might even win an Oscar.

That is all the positives I can say about the film.

Other than Lopez there are a large amount of other supporting characters, such as Annabelle, (Lili Reinhart of Riverdale fame), all of these characters aren’t fleshed out or, developed beyond one or two memorable traits. In the case of Reinhart her gimmick, and that truly is an apt choice of word, is that she is sick whenever she is stressed and that she has a bad home life, those are the only two things you know about her character; so a developed supporting cast is something you can’t find here.

In my opinion, the main issue with Hustlers is Constance Wu; she is incredibly unlikable and doesn’t work as the main character we are supposed to root for. She is given various traits to make her more sympathetic, but all they seem to do is reinforce just how unlikable she is. I don’t know if she is just upstaged by Jennifer Lopez’s electrifying performance, but to me, Wu was incredibly miscast.

What’s more and it needs to be said, the film doesn’t view men in a good light at all, even one in the third act who is supposed to be sympathetic he is still treated with contempt; that said, though in the context of the film it makes sense why they have this view. At no point does it feel forced in, it makes sense from the character motivations; it just something that needs to be talked about in regards to this film.

Overall the film is worth seeing for Jennifer Lopez’s fantastic performance alone; it is just a shame the rest of the cast can’t live up to her. An average to good crime film.

3/5

Reviewed by Luke

IT Chapter 2 and the mass appeal of Horror.

Horror cinema has been around for decades, and over the years it has grown in popularity more and more, to the point that now when IT chapter 2 comes out, it can be a huge hit. I want to talk about why that is, and how horror has gone from a very niche thing to rising to prominence in mainstream culture; then I’ll touch on my thoughts for IT chapter 2.

Horror Cinema has always had a dedicated audience whether its kids and teenagers going to see matinees back in the 50s and 60s, to the rise of Hammer Horror. However, it has never been a genre that Studios have seen as viable for a broad audience, as it forgoes a lot of the profitable demographics. The reason for this is that not everyone likes to be scared, unlike comedy that can appeal to a lot of people, the desire to be scared and in effect horror, in general, is far more niche. Furthermore, horror can offend people they may not think that a film showing such a thing, should be viewed.

Despite that in recent years with the rise of giants like Blumhouse and A24, horror is very much in vogue; it continues to rise and rise with more and more people seeing it as not only profitable but also a creatively free genre, with marketing agencies and big studios realising there is a lot of money to be made off the dedicated fan base that there has always been for horror.

That brings us to the film I am going to cover today, IT Chapter 2.
Chapter 2 carries on from the 2017 release of IT, based off the Stephen King book of the same name, about an entity that preys on the townspeople of Derry, Maine; every 27 years. Where the first chapter focused on the Losers Club, the main protagonists, as children, Part 2 sees them returning as adults when Pennywise the Dancing Clown, the before mentioned entity, awakens from his slumber; to have one final showdown.

I believe in many ways, this film was not as good as the first chapter and a far cry from the 90s miniseries, but it was never going to be. IT Chapter 2 suffered from something a lot of big films do these days, that is being overhyped, these films get talked about and talked about to such an extent that they have to be a perfect film otherwise people are going to feel disappointed, and to a degree cheated; very few films can live up to this standard.

My thoughts on the film can be summed up like this, for a movie that runs for nearly 3 hours, it feels rushed. A lot of key scenes, in terms of character development, from the book are left out; such is the issue with trying to stuff a mammoth book into two films. Adding to this fact, and making it all the worse, is that this film suffers from severe pacing issues. Whilst there are elements of comedy in the original novel it is never front and centre, conversely in this film, there are scenes where comedy is artificially forced in, why this is done is beyond me as it takes away from any sort of tension.

Additionally, though the main characters are well cast and all the actors do a good job, Pennywise, for many people the selling point of these films, is mostly underused, with him being reserved mainly for the final act.
This leaves us with a lot of boring scenes of the Losers Club members walking the streets of Derry and reminiscing about their childhoods, with the occasional jump-scare put in to remind you, that although you may have forgotten, you’re watching a horror film.

Ultimately though there are good aspects, this film feels rushed and also overly drawn out at the same time, and that is something that ruins the movie overall; with it needing a tighter focus.

3/5

Reviewed by Luke

Once Upon A Time In Hollywood: A Love Letter To Tarantino

Preface: When I first saw this film, I didn’t like it, but after seeing it the second time I have much more of an appreciation for it.

Once Upon A Time In Hollywood, is the 9th film by acclaimed director Quentin Tarantino, and is in a sense a retelling of the real-life Manson Murders; all bit it with a twist, but I’m not going to spoil that here. The film itself reads like a love letter to the Golden Age of Hollywood, as well as to the 1960s.

The plot of the film revolves around three intersecting stories, each focusing on one of the three main cast members, Brad Pitt,( Cliff Booth), Leonardo DiCaprio, (Rick Dalton), and Margot Robbie, (Sharon Tate). Rick’s story focuses on him realising he is past his peak in terms of acting and, needs to adapt his ways to stay relevant. Booth is mainly a supportive figure to Dalton, being there to lend a hand, although his story line does bring about the Manson Family element which adds an exciting spark to the film*.

*I believe knowing about the events of the Manson Murders before going in to see the film, adds a sense of dread to the proceedings, with you knowing it’s just a matter of time before the killings happen; if you don’t know the history the final act of the film can feel like it’s just come out of nowhere.

The third and final main character, Robbie’s Tate is by far the weakest as she is given the least to do, and I didn’t notice this the first time around, but nothing much to say as well; her amount of dialogue compared to Pitt’s and DiCaprio’s is none existent; she mainly exists to dance around to various 60’s tunes and go on drawn-out trips to the movies.

On the flip side of that, the writing and the dialogue for both Booth and Dalton is well done, both of their characters seem like people, they’re relatable and easy to root for. Moreover, one of the final scenes of the film shows the relationship between these two men, in such a perfect away, it’s incredibly effective.

My biggest complaint against the film is the pacing of it. A lot, and I mean 60% + of the scenes feel like they could have been edited down, a lot of them weren’t vital and just served to reinforce and retell us things about the characters we already knew. Adding to this complaint, we only actually see Charles Manson, for one scene; which is incredibly brief. I don’t know if they shot more scenes and they didn’t make it in, but it leaves said scenes feeling oddly out of place.

Overall there are things to like about this film; both leading men are charming, there are some excellent celebrity cameos, but it doesn’t hide the fact that this is one of Tarantino’s weaker efforts.
The man has a stellar catalogue, with the likes of Django Unchained and Inglorious Bastards, but this seems like a mismatch of different things and ideas that don’t come together.
To summaries, I loved 40% of the film, but the other 60% was just too long, too dragged out and, dare I say it too self indulgent.

3/5

Reviewed by Luke

Yesterday: The Best Film of Summer 2019

Summer 2019 has, in terms of film, been one of the most disappointing in recent memory. We’ve seen unwanted remakes and reimaginings; beloved series shoot themselves in the head, looking at you Men In Black International and, your genius decision to not bring Will Smith back. Overall Summer 2019 has been in a word- meh.

The highlights would probably include, Brightburn for sheer originality, Toy Story 4 for not being a blatant cash grab and, Spider-man Far From Home, which let’s face it is only really cared about now because it might be the last one in the MCU.

Horror was in pretty good form over the summer though, with Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark and Midsommar both being fantastic films, sadly the horror front was let down by the lacklustre Annabelle Comes Home from the Conjuring Universe, but at least 2 out of 3 isn’t bad.

However, one film stood above all as the best film of the summer, at least to me, that film was Yesterday. Yesterday is a British ‘Feel Good’ Romantic Comedy, focusing on talented but, overlooked musician Jack Malik, (Himesh Patel), as he, after a bike crash, wakes up in a world where no one remembers the Beatles, except him and two others. What follows is Jack’s rise to fame as he takes credit for writing and singing all of the Beatles most famous songs, along the way he learns what’s important to him, and that fame isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

Though the premise, Beatle-less world aside, has been done a million and one times before, there is something about Yesterday, so endearing and undeniably positive, that you can’t help but smile. It hits on a lot of different emotional cores and leaves you happier than when you went in; there is no doubt about that.

The film is well-executed and planned out, with each musical sequences feeling needed and relevant to the plot of the film, rather than just feeling like it’s there to be “remember this song”, as so many other musicals do. This goes to show that Director Danny Boyle hasn’t lost his streak for making great films, said streak brought us the likes of Trainspotting 1 and 2 and is still very present here.

A significant plot point of the film focuses on the will they won’t they, relationship between Jack and his childhood best friend Ellie, (Lilly James). The chemistry between James and Patel is palpable, which makes the eventual relationship not only believable but, also one you can’t help to root for and, become invested in. The interesting twist on the standard unrequited or, overlook love angle here is that it’s James’ Ellie who is madly in love with Jack, but he can’t see it and, thinks they are just friends. This twist on the standard gender roles this story angle usually has is fascinating and, something more films should do.

Finally, the film’s music is infectious, even if you don’t like or, for some reason don’t know the Beatles, their music is used in such a heartfelt and touching way here; that you can’t help but, sing along. Yesterday is a love letter to the Beatles and to music in general and, that fact shines brightly in every scene.

If you haven’t already, you should see this film, as I can guarantee it will put a smile on your face and, make just a little bit happier.

5/5

Review by Luke

Gremlins: The Best Christmas Film

With summer coming to a close we begin the slow march towards Christmas, it really does get earlier every year, as such I want to write about my favourite Christmas/ Holiday movie of all time; Gremlins.

The idea of a Christmas film is usually something happy and upbeat, enjoyable by the whole family, things like Home Alone and the Santa Claus spring to mind. In that parameter, Gremlins doesn’t really fit in; it is a horror-comedy film, unusual Christmas movie fare. However, that’s what works so well about it; it subverts all the stereotypes about what defines a Christmas movie, while still being set at Christmas, coming across almost as a homage.

To give some background to the film, it was released in the summer of 1984; it was a considerable hit commercially and critically and, this along with Raiders of the Lost Ark lead to the creation of the PG-13 rating. The plot of the film revolves around Billy, (Zach Gilligan), as he receives a Gremlin, here called a Mogwai, from his father as a Christmas present. Upon receiving Gizmo the mogwai, Billy has to learn and keep to the stringent rules of ownership; otherwise, there will be disastrous consequences, to spoil it, he breaks the rules and chaos ensues.

This film portrays Christmas, not as this sweet idyllic time of the year, but rather as this crazy manic time where everything is continuously moving, a move which I find refreshing. Furthermore, the relationship between Billy and Gizmo is very relatable to anyone who has ever got a pet on Christmas morning, with this relationship being the beating heart of the film.

Gizmo himself is easily the cutest puppet in film ever; he has a distinct look that makes him easily recognisable and iconic. Furthermore, the facial movements of the character convey emotion to significant effect, leading you not only to root for Gizmo but also viewing him as somewhat of the main character. Comparatively, the evil gremlins, because yes, there are more gremlins, and some of them are or, become evil, actually inspire fear. The puppetry of these gremlins conveys malice and menace as their different design comes across as ugly and monstrous, which the film uses to great effect, showing us the difference between cute happy Gizmo and the evil other gremlins.

The humour in this film is also incredibly well done being funny and very endearing; the gore of the film also works to this extent. With a lot of the kills towards the end of the film, being quite comedic in their brutality, in almost a Zombieland esque kind of fashion.
There is so much charm and heart to this film that it quickly makes it’s self one of the most memorable films of the 80s, having a legacy that lives on way over 30 years later. The sequel, while still entertaining couldn’t live up to the heights of the first film and fell short in many ways. However there is now talk of a Gremlins series coming to the small screen, so there is clearly still demand after all these years.
In my opinion, the first Gremlins is a must-see and one of the best films to watch at Christmas, if only as a palate cleanser to all those sickly emotional Christmas films that plague the holiday season, like ghosts that refuse to die.

Angel has Fallen: What makes an Action Hero?

There is an art to being an action star; it’s something only few can do; fewer still convincingly. Therein lies today’s topic I want to talk about what makes a convincing action star, and how all that can and will change over time. When you imagine an action hero, you imagine a tough person in the prime of their life, ready and able to do whatever it takes to save the day. Keanu Reeves is believable in John Wick because he trains incredibly hard and has excellent stunt coordination. The is true of Sigourney Weaver in Aliens as well; she is a believable badass, due to a well-developed character and great set pieces/ stunt work. This brings us to the meat of what I want to talk about today the recently released blockbuster Angel Has Fallen.

Angel Has Fallen is the third film in the Fallen series, carrying on from the events of Olympus Has Fallen and London Has Fallen. The third film focuses on Mike Banning, (Gerard Butler), as he faces off against the Government when he is framed for murder. A big part of the film focuses on the effect being a Secret Service agent is having on Mikes health, as he is not the man he used to be anymore. Despite that being a theme, the action in this film comes off as some of the laziest and most uninspired of recent history. I understand from a plot perspective Mike can’t be doing the same things he was doing in the first film, but other than some shooting and running he doesn’t really do all that much.

Maybe I have been spoiled with well planned out, well-executed action movies like this year’s John Wick, but in any case, I don’t see a reason to release an action movie, when it is clear that no one really cares, cookie-cutter in the extreme might as well be this films tagline.

What makes this all the more troubling is Gerard Butler himself. There was a time at the start of the 2000s where Butler’s name was being said in the same breath as Jason Statham and Arnold Schwarzenegger when it came to action stars; this was mainly due to the release of 300, which catapulted Butler into action superstardom. Cut to now, and the performance he gives in Angel Has Fallen is one of tiredness, it is clear he doesn’t want to be there anymore; crucially he isn’t believable as the character in this film. I know Butler can do better than this, he proved he can still be a viable and menacing action star in last year’s Den of Thieves. However, none of what made his performance good in that film is carried over.

To conclude, I think the Fallen series needs to be taken out back and shot; it is the merciful thing to do. We are a long way from the heights of the first film and, the longer it goes on, the more unbelievable Butler becomes as an action star, which is a shame. My final thought is that Butler needs to think carefully about the roles he picks, focusing more on films like Machine Gun Preacher and Law Abiding Citizen, where he shone through as a relatable action star.
What’s more, for the love of all of us when Fallen 4 comes a-knocking, Gerard, don’t answer.

1.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

The Life and Death of Spider-man

Spider-man is one of Marvel’s most famous and beloved characters, as such, we have seen plenty of him on the big screen over the years; with three series and countless other properties attached to the character. It is these series and the future of the Webslinger I would like to talk about today, trying to keep it impartial from the whole Marvel Studios vs Sony spat; as they are both a little in the wrong.
The Sam Raimi Trilogy is to many the best of the Spider-man films to date, just don’t mention Spider-man 3, this was the first big-budget, big-screen adaptions of the character and a lot of people were very excited for it. Raimi’s trilogy nailed many vital details of who Spider-man is and what he stands for, showing his relationship with his Aunt and Uncle and as the series developed his romance with Mary Jane Watson. As the trilogy went on the films got bolder and bolder, diving further into Spider-man’s Lore; with many classic villains adapted, to various degrees of success. Therein lay the problem, as the series reached the end it started adding too many elements to the story, having so many plot threads they couldn’t all be addressed; whether by studio mandate or, by a poorly written script, it was this that would end Raimi’s trilogy on a sour note, and continue to be a problem going forward.
Years later talks broke down with Raimi to make the much speculated about Spider-man 4 and, so the Mark Webb Amazing Spider-man series was born. Webb set out right away to make sure his series of films was tonally and visually very different than the Raimi films that predated it. The humorous goofiness of the Raimi trilogy was swapped out for a more edgy and mature tone; they also favoured the Gwen Stacy romance over the Mary Jane one; all to set it apart. Of the three series, this one has the worst reputation, but I genuinely believe the first Amazing Spider-man film was excellent, the romance between Emma Stone and Andre Garfield was quickly the best and most moving part of the films. Then the Amazing Spider-man 2 came out, and just like Raimi’s third instalment, it was marred by the overuse of familiar villain characters, most likely in a hamfisted way of setting up a Sinister Six film so they could spin it out into another franchise.
Then for the third attempt at a Spider-man on the big screen, the character was returned to the MCU, where he could rub shoulders with the likes of Captain America and Iron Man. Many would say that these were the best Spider-man live-action films, and though the humour was pitch-perfect and Far From Home made me tear up a little, these films weren’t without their issues. Many didn’t like how symbiotic the relationship between Tony Stark and Peter Parker was, finding that the latter was losing some of his identity in favour of being more like the former, there is a scene in Far From Home that confirms this.
Now at the time of writing Spider-man is currently between fought over by Marvel Studios and Sony, with each wanting him for their films. However, what the character deserves is the chance to shine for who he is, rather than have him be just another part of a larger whole. Similarly, he deserves to have his story told the right away and not have nonsensical plot threads stuffed into his films just as an effort to set up other films to make more money.
Ultimately a great Spider-man story can be told with just a handful of characters, and a bit of careful consideration and both studios would do well to remember that.

The Exorcist: A Titan of Horror Cinema

The Exorcist is a 1973, American horror film, revolving around the possession of Regan MacNeil; and the priests that try and save her soul. Though this premise seems like nothing new by today’s standards where we watch someone get possessed on the big screen, every other week, it was incredibly novel for its time. Upon release, it went to war with rating boards, who had never seen something, as they put it, “so obscene”, and there were reports of the film being so scary it was making people have fits in the cinema. So much so that the British government banned the film outright. Watching the film today and comparing it to the sort of things we might see in a 2019 horror film, the film looks incredibly tame and, it is hard to understand what upset censors so much; however it did push things in horror cinema upon release.
The Exorcist will always be one of the best horror films of all time and a must-watch: because despite almost being 50 years old the film is still just as chilling as when it first came out. The film puts the atmosphere and tension at the forefront, and we see a slow build in the demonic activity until it reaches vomiting green slime level. This is much appreciated as it leads the following actions to appear far more shocking by comparison, but also further enforces just how horrific the ordeal is for little Regan.
The practical effects work is also something to be revered, as some of the most iconic shots in all of horror cinema come from this film and they were all practical, the head-spinning scene is proof of my point.
The plot of the film never lets up, never giving you a minute to catch your breath, even at the end, the twists and turns keep coming; keeping you guessing even after the credits roll.
The acting in this film is the stuff of legend, and so many movies have tried to harness or harken back to it in more recent year, with Linda Blair selling the possession of Regan so well that you start to believe it. Max Von Sydow, plays the tired old priest, who is beginning to lose his faith brought out to fight the incarnation of evil, to perfection, quickly making him a horror icon.
Lastly, the dream sequences at the start of the film that mark the beginning of Regan’s possession, are so hauntingly beautiful, the cinematography for these scenes has almost a dreamlike air to it; which really help to give them their flavour and set them apart from the rest of the film.
The later sequels would go on to tarnish the film’s legacy to a degree, but nothing can, or ever will change that fact that this is one of the most impactful, inspiring, captivating horror films of all time. That is simply a fact.
Ps. The Exorcist TV show was pretty good as well.
5/5
Reviewed by Luke

Creature Design and Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark

Across all of Horror Cinema, there have been a collection of creatures that have not only captured the imagination but, also terrified. These creatures have all been practical, not CGI. When you think of monsters like The Creeper from Jeepers Creepers, their looks sticks out because of how well designed and realistic it is. Creature design and attention to detail can mean the difference between a terrifying horror movie villain and a joke. It’s on that note I talk about the subject of today’s review Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark.
Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark is a horror film; based on the children’s books of the same name. The plot of the film revolves around a group of teenagers that find a book in an abandoned house, the curious leader of the group Stella, (Zoe Colletti), decides to take the book home; a decision she will regret forever. Once she takes it home and looks through it, stories start to appear on their own; targeting her and her friends.
Going into this film, I was expecting something akin to the Goosebumps film of a few years ago; with the stories coming to life and running amuck; how wrong I was. The stories that come to life feel personal and precisely tailored to each character, as the book plays off each one of their fears, whereas, in the other film, it was merely random. The scares work well and, though there are a few jump scares peppered throughout, there is also a keen scene of atmosphere and dread which permeates the film. However, the most praiseworthy aspect of the film’s horror is by far the creature design. Now there are several creatures in this film, as it is broken down in a collection of short stories, with a broader narrative to bind them all. Each separate creature is unique, and it is plain to see how much care has been put into them down to the smallest detail. This is no doubt the influence of producer Guillermo del Toro, who is known for his love of practical monsters. I believe these villains are the films greatest strength and help it to stand apart from the 1000 other generic horror films with forgettable monsters and demons.
The characters, unlike the monsters, are all rather one-note, being dull and nonmemorable. The group of kids never really graduate from the teenage outcast stereotype and, are more caricatures; you won’t remember who any of the characters are 5 seconds after the film ends and, you won’t remember their names during it. That said, the film is on the whole incredibly well done and impressive, even the low age rating doesn’t take away from the film, as it does in some cases, the horror and the deaths are all well-executed and chilling without the need for excessive gore, and I think that says a lot to the film’s credit.
Overall this was a horror film where you can tell the people making it care, the creature design speaks to that, it masters the subtle art of scares so entirely that you will be thinking of the film’s monsters long after you’ve gone home, shame the same can’t be said for the characters; this may well be the horror hit of the summer, and I for one can’t wait for more scary stories to tell in the dark,
4.5/5
Reviewed by Luke