Lou: Netflix Needs To Learn That Having The Most Bad Action Films Isn’t A Good Thing

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Because it is still so fresh and novel, sarcasm, an old person has surprising skills and helps prevent a kidnapping.

So when I saw the trailer for this action thriller film starring Alison Janney I was intrigued, I wanted to see how this film would be different from the hundreds of other films in the genre that share the same premise, and the honest answer is that it isn’t.

This film was a slog to get through because the more it went on the more obvious it became just how generic it is. Nothing happens that you don’t already know is going to happen, in that regard it is certainly one of the most predictable action thrillers I have ever seen. This fact is not even made up for by the action, which is pretty bog standard again.

The performances across the board are instantly forgettable and the film does not use its talented cast in anyway to bring out their skill.

Overall, yet another boring Netflix action film.

Pros.

It has mildly appealing premise

It is sometimes quite unintentionally funny

Cons.

It is boring and bland and so is the action

It wastes a fairly talented cast

It is predictable

It has pacing issues

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

Werewolf By Night: The Savior Of The MCU

4.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Meet the supernatural side of the MCU

I thought this was one of the best things I have seen out of the MCU in a long time. It reminded me of why I care so much about this universe in the first place. I will admit up front that I am a big fan of the supernatural characters in the comics Blade, Ghost Rider, Moon Knight and Elsa Bloodstone has always been a particular favourite so I might be a little bias on this one. However, going against that is the idea that I went into this with a lot higher expectations than a lot of other people who might not care about the characters of Werewolf by Night, played by Gael Garcia Bernal, and Elsa Bloodstone, played by Laura Donnelly. Not only were my expectations met but vastly exceeded.

I really enjoyed seeing these horror elements interact with the MCU formula and I thought that this unlike some of the newer entries into the MCU actually felt quite fresh and new. There is an obvious inspiration from classic horror which works well here, and the use of black and white adds to both that aesthetic but also allows for more violence to be shown. I would say that in terms of gore this is probably the furthest we have ever seen the MCU go, it is not Saw, but for the MCU it might as well be there is some grizzly kills.

Bernal and Donnelly both do a terrific job and easily become beloved, again maybe I am bias. Though I can’t wait to see more of them going forward, I do have two little nit-picky complaints firstly this special does not explain Jack Russell/ Werewolf By Nights origins at all and just throws you into things, I would have added a few scenes highlighting his backstory a little more, and secondly that when the switch to colour does happen Elsa doesn’t have her trademark red hair. I know that second one is pathetically pedantic, but hey.

Overall, a magnificent first outing for Marvel’s special presentations.

Pros.

Donnelly

Bernal

Man-Thing was also really great, didn’t get to him in the review so I wanted to give him some praise here

The horror elements

The gore

Cons.

A few little nit-picky issues

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Jeepers Creepers Reborn: The Youtube Sketch Parody No One Asked For

0.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

The parody film to the Jeepers Creepers franchise.

I liked Iron Sky and enjoyed what they did with it, but that same style was never going to work with a serious horror film. As such what we get is a joke that takes various elements from the previous films and then spits them back at us through a fake out almost spoof lens. This film wants desperately for you to take it seriously, but ultimately it is so damned goofy and silly that it is almost impossible to do so.

Moreover, you can really tell this film was made on the cheap. Now I am not saying there is anything wrong with small budget films, but this one does it in all the worst sort of ways. It gives us lots of close up shots of the Creeper, and he just looks like a dude in body paint. This film goes out of its way to make the Creeper as tame and non-threatening as possible. Also don’t get me started on the baby cult thing.

Really I found there to be nothing redeemable about this film.

Overall, awful just awful.

Pros.

It is laughably bad at times

Cons

It is basically a parody of the series

The Creeper looks awful

The cult of the Creeper thing destroys the monster

It is not scary

It is aggressively average

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Hocus Pocus: Is It The Season Of The Witch

4/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A trio of witches are resurrected in the modern day by a group of kids.

For a long time I had heard what a Halloween season classic this film was, but had personally never seen it. Now after having watched it I can see the appeal, but I wouldn’t call it a classic.

In my mind this has a very American, very Disney feel to it everything is very comfortably middle class everyone is very white and there is no real peril throughout. Now am I saying that is inherently a bad thing? Not necessarily as sometimes that is the sort of film you want, I enjoyed the whimsy of the film and thought the horror elements were there enough to keep me engaged.

The kids were all fairly bland as they often are in these sort of films, they have very basic issues like relationships and having just moved to town but that isn’t really enough to get you to care about them. The witches played by Sarah Jessica Parker, Bette Midler, and Kathy Najimy far much better and are far more defined, your feeling towards these characters will determine whether you like this movie or not. Personally, I liked all of them and thought they all had their own moments to shine, I would have liked a little more backstory on their part and further character development but it’s a family film so that is unlikely.

Overall, a lot of fun but nothing particularly astonishing.

Pros.

It is fun

The witches are all entertaining

It has a low-fi charm

It has a number of good jokes

Cons.

The witches could be better developed

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Night Of The Living Dead: They Are Going To Get You

2.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

The original zombie film.

Another classic horror film that left me rather cold. Now I can see the merit of the film and I think the social commentary is fairly daring for the time period, especially the ending, but I also thought that the film suffered from pacing issues galore. Whilst watching there were multiple times I thought the film was surely about to end, but then it just kept going.

This film didn’t really do anything new with zombies from my modern perspective, however, it was hugely influential to their development at the time. I thought the zombies here were more goofy than scary, I understand that it was a low budget film but the make up on the zombies doesn’t even look remotely convincing, they look more like angry people who have had a bad day then the undead.

I thought the performances across the board were fairly solid with Judith O’Dea and Duncan Jones both being worthy of being singled out for praise.

Overall, a very important film at the time but one that struggles in the modern landscape.

Pros.

The performances

The social commentary

It is watchable

Cons.

It is goofy

The zombie make up effects aren’t very good

It has terrible pacing issues

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

The Birds: Why Is Hitchcock A Cinematic Icon? I Don’t Get It

2/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A woman with too much time on her hands, played by Tipi Hedren, starts getting attacked by birds.

I am going to say something that within some film circles is the highest form of blasphemy so get ready. I don’t really like the films of Alfred Hitchcock, I think they are often slow and badly paced, and more often then not seem to think they are smarter than they actually are. His films have a certain smugness to them, the only one I actually like is Psycho.

Anyway, I did not think this was the worst film I have ever seen but I did think it was boring. Scene after scene of Hedren’s characters personal drama as she obsesses over a man she met in a pet shop, played by Rod Taylor. Honestly it is quite a ways into the film where the titular birds start to turn bad until that point you would be forgiven for thinking you are watching some old fashioned drama/romance film. The pace during this early section is so bad that it almost made me turn it off.

I enjoyed the cinematography and the shot choice and would even go so far as to say a few of the shots were quite inspired, but this didn’t make up for the wider short comings of the film. Chief amongst these I would say were the performances that frequently felt quite wooden.

Overall, painfully slow.

Pros.

A few strong shot choices

Visually a beautiful film

Cons.

It is badly paced

The birds don’t turn bad until way into the film

The performances are fairly wooden

It is boring

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Bros: Insulting Your Audience

1.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

The first big studio rom-com to feature same sex leads, if you ignore Love Simon and a few others.

Honestly I just didn’t think this film was very funny. Somewhere in between all the jokes about how straight people are lame and the gross out sex gags I found myself questioning why for such an important film for a number of reasons they didn’t do their best to at least give it a good script and a few passable jokes. The humour of this film is at times aggressively unfunny and by that I mean that the film is actively angry at you for not laughing along with it, thinking that every joke made is the peak of comedy and that you are just a philistine for not laughing.

Another thing going against this film is the star Billy Eichner. Now I have seen Eichner before in a few other things and I stand by the idea that in small doses his particular shtick is funny, however, being exposed to it for over an hour proves to be unbearable. Additionally, Eichner’s character really isn’t particularly likeable and I found it hard to root for his happiness. Adding to that are the comments Eichner has made post release wherein he has said the reason the film has underperformed is not because of a weak script or unfunny jokes but because audiences are homophobic. Though this is true to an extent, it reeks of someone on the defensive lashing out because their ego got hurt, it also does nothing to make an audience want to see the movie because why support a star who is calling them names?

Overall, this film is important there is no doubt about that, but sadly what we got was incredibly mediocre with a leading man who is ill suited to the task.

Pros.

It is an important step forward for diversity within film

It is watchable

Cons.

Eichner is no leading man

It is unfunny

It has terrible pacing

It repeatedly lampoons straight people and then expects that audience to come out and support the film.

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Village Of The Damned: Beware The Stare

4/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

After a mysterious incident all the women of a small town fall pregnant, a while later their offspring develop otherworldly abilities.

I want to preface this review by saying that I have never read The Midwich Cuckoos before, as such I was unfamiliar with the story. Had I seen one of the other numerous adaptions beforehand or shared some familiarity with the story I may not have enjoyed it as much.

I thought this film was really well done, it did a lot of work with atmosphere and had a show but don’t tell sort of approach to the film’s monsters. I have always found there to be something slightly disconcerting about little children especially when they gather together as such this film was bound to trigger fears in me. I thought the ‘evil’ kids here had a well-acted alien quality to them and I don’t know if they were inspired by the classic idea of the black eyed children within folklore, but if so they added a whole new dimension to it.

I also thought the pacing was really well done, far too many modern horror films try and cram in as much artsy imagery and subtext as they can bloating the film into a multi-hour behemoths which then lose sight of their scares, whereas this film does it right. I thought the runtime was tight and left just the right amount of plot to the imagination.

Overall, a very effective creepy kids movie.

Pros.

The scares

The atmosphere

The pacing

The performances

Cons.

It is a little antiquated

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

The Horror Of Dracula: From Transylvania To Klausenberg

3/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A retelling of the classic Dracula tale.

I have long heard that this is one of the definitive takes on the classic novel, however, now after seeing I think that it lacks a certain something. Obviously, I am approaching this old film with modern sensibilities so some things will be lost in translation, but I think that it really suffers from clearly being very low budget. Now I know Hammer Horror was low budget and campy and that was all part of the charm, but I think here due to limitations Dracula, played by Christopher Lee, was able to be set up as a truly terrifying threat.

Moreover, I also think that this film makes a number of odd changes to the book that seem to serve no purpose other than to be confusing, as for the most part it is just swapping around character names and backstories somewhat. I don’t really understand why the film did this as it certainly didn’t add anything.

However, the incredibly strong positive this film has going for it is the legendary Christopher Lee, who easily blends into the role of Dracula and I thought was able to make the role his own and put his personal spin on it. Lee saves this film from mediocrity.

Overall, a very average film pushed up by Christopher Lee.

Pros.

Lee

It is very watchable

The final battle

Cons.

It makes strange changes to the source material for no real reason

It’s low budget hurts it in places

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Dead Silence: James Wan’s Puppet Movie

3/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

The arrival of a ventriloquist’s dummy spells doom for Jamie, played by Ryan Kwanten.

I will give this film a slightly above average score for the fact that it does boast some quite unsettling visuals and did also leave me feeling somewhat disconcerted. I think the film’s strongest element is its horror, however everywhere else it is let down.

I think the lets call it ‘industrial’ style James Wan used on the first Saw film that he tries to bring over to this film just doesn’t work at all. The two films are very different beasts and the carried over style hurts the film a lot. Nowhere is this clearer then in the final moments of the film where we get a very Saw-like twist with the same accompanying music and everything.

Speaking off the twist ending really doesn’t work, because rather than bringing everything together it instead leaves you saying, ‘wait what’ and makes the film incredibly goofy. Any kind of tension or scares are immediately undercut when you realise that a man who has played a fairly large supporting role in the film as a whole was supposed to have been a puppet the whole time. Dumb.

Overall, some neat horror visuals, but fairly weak everywhere else.

Pros.

A few good scares

Some cool effects work and make up design

It is very watchable

Cons.

The twist doesn’t work

Wan reuses the same style from Saw and it doesn’t work

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer