The Nightingale: The Heart Of Darkness

‘The Nightingale’ is a period drama film directed by Jennifer Kent, her second film after the critically acclaimed ‘The Babadook’. The plot of the film revolves around Irish convict Clare (Aisling Franciosi), who suffers a horrific tragedy that result in her losing everything, the events that follow show her as she treks across the Tasmania bush in search of the men that wronged her; So she can enact a brutal act of retribution upon them.

Before I get into this review, I just want to say this is a grueling film to watch, deeply uncomfortable and unpleasant at times, but that seems to be by design. There are disturbing acts of violence and sexual violence depicted in this film that set up Claire’s character motivation and show the horrific place that the Tasmanian Bush was at this point in time.

If that doesn’t put you off there is a lot to appreciate about this film. Firstly, is the attention to detail payed in the setting and how the events of the story play out, the 1825 Van Diemen’s Land that Kent brings to life is unlike anything I had previously seen. The world this film presents is harsh and incredibly unforgiving and it makes you aware of horrors of history that you might not have been aware of.

The performances are excellent as well. Franciosi is a marvel to behold the emotions that her character conveys are both striking and affecting. She is entirely believable as a woman who has lost everything and is now a ghost of the person she was before, driven only by revenge. Furthermore, the gradual friendship she forms with Aboriginal tracker Billy (Baykail Ganambarr), she sweet and brings a bit of levity to an otherwise deeply oppressive, depressing film.

Ganambarr is excellent especially when you consider that this is this first feature film performance. His character of Billy not only brings some humour to the film, but also provides a door into the Aboriginal world which we don’t often see represented in cinema. Billy does at times outshine Claire, but both are fantastic.

Sam Claflin is also in this film he plays the sadistic antagonist Hawkins. Claflin is quickly making a name for himself as a skilled actor especially for playing villains, he plays a loathsome bastard better than anyone else. He completely loses himself in the role and delivers yet another magnificent performance.

Overall, this film can be hard to watch at times, you will feel the urge to turn it off, but if you can stick with it there is something special here. ‘The Nightingale’ is far more of a nuanced take on the Rape-Revenge subgenre and has a lot to say and has some great performances to back it up.

Pros.

Powerful.

Excellent Performances.

A Great Follow Up.

Bringing Attention To Issues.

Cons.

Very Very Very Hard To Watch At Times.

4/5

Reviewed by Luke

Creep: Another Comedian To Horror Maestro Success Story

‘Creep’ is an independent found footage psychological horror film directed by Patrick Brice. The narrative follows Aaron (Played by Brice), as a camera man who answers an online ad, to go and film Josef (Mark Duplass) for the day. As the day plays out Aaron quickly realises that Josef is not who he claims to be, and things take a turn for the worse.

I had heard praise for this film for quite some time, but for one reason or another I hadn’t got around to seeing it and now that I have, I can tell you it is terrific. Found footage as a genre as been done to death, no argument can be made that will convince me otherwise, with the likes of the Blair Witch revival and the continued Paranormal Activity franchise, I believed there was nothing left in this genre that could shock or perhaps scare me, I was wrong.

The reason why ‘Creep’ is scary is all down to the writing and the characterisation of Josef. When we are introduced to him, we are told he is a sick man with only a few weeks to live, this get us to feel sorry for him, as the film progress we see that he is a little odd, but crucially we still like him. Even in the films third act when everything has become very manic Josef is still treated like a sympathetic character that’s why Aaron goes to see him one last time.

The complete shifts in mood that Duplass so perfectly brings to the screen wherein we see Josef go from Sad to Manic to Evil are chilling. With the final reveal showing us that Aaron is not the first victim, but instead one of many, making you as an individual, question how you could be so wrong about a character as for the most part of the film you thought he was a likeable sympathetic character.

As I have said before in other reviews, I find mental illness and the threat humans poses to each other and man-made evil, much more frightening than a demon or a ghost. I believe 100% that it is this focus on a threat that is very real, something that could realistically happen to any of us at any time, that makes this film so scary.

A genuinely shocking horror film that showed me there was still some life in the found footage genre.

Pros.

The Novel Approach To Found Footage.

Duplass.

The Excellent Tension And Scares.

Making You Question Which Characters You Trust In Future.

Cons.

It’s A Little Bit Goofy At Times When It Shouldn’t Be.

Cam: Often Extreme

‘Cam’ is a psychological horror film about cam girl Lola_Lola (Madeline Brewer), who one day finds that her account has been taken over by a girl who looks like her, a double: she then races to try and regain control of her account and stop the damage the double is doing to her life.

‘Cam’ is an uncomfortable watch that is the best way to describe it. It has many scenes that will make your skin crawl and will repulse you. There is a scene in the film’s third act where Lola, or Alice as that is her non-cam name, repeatedly hits a table with her face breaking her nose: there are minutes in this sequence where we can see her nose literally hanging off her face. I am not opposed to gore in any way, I love the work of Eli Roth, but there is something about this part of the film that made me feel sick. That is my main complaint with this film, it often goes too far.

The same can be said with the cam scenes themselves which again sometimes go a little far and border on soft-core porn. I understand that the writer of this film was a cam girl herself at one stage in her life and wanted to originally make this film a documentary, but even still.

Brewer plays both of the personas really well; I mean both Lola and her double as well as Alice and Lola. Throughout the course of the film you start to care for her and fear for her as she is in real danger. The threats in this film aren’t always what you would expect them to be: this isn’t a film like ‘US’ where the double try and get rid of the person, rather the threats come from the world of the cam girls. By that I mean the people who are paying them, some of Alice’s clients become quite threatening towards her and it makes you think about what would drive someone to willingly put themselves in danger like that.

As strange as it might be to say about a film revolving around cam girls, this film really makes you think. The interesting thing for me is that the double isn’t the antagonist of the film not really, the real antagonist of the film seems to be the clients and the world of camming which for me makes the film far more interesting. This is not an easy film to watch, but if you do manage to sit through it there are some fascinating ideas being floated around.

Pros.

Making The World The Threat.

Brewster.

A Great Sense Of Tension.

Some intriguing Ideas Being Explored.

Cons.

A Little Too Graphic For Me, In Multiple Regards.

The Woman In Black, Angel of Death: The Fight For A Random Orphan

‘The Woman In Black: Angel of Death’ is a supernatural horror film and is a sequel to 2012 ‘Woman In Black’ film. The plot this time around follows Eve Parkin (Phoebe Fox), a school teacher who accompanies some of her pupils out of the city during the London Blitz, the house they arrive at is, of course, Eel Marsh House; home to the infamous Woman In Black.

If you read my review of the first film, you know that I love the ‘Woman In Black’ it is a classic British ghost story and one of the best horror films in modern years. However, at no point did I or, anyone else think that it needed a sequel.

Angel of Death falls to the same pitfalls as ‘Sinister 2’, by that I mean they lose the mystique of their predecessor by over-exposing their villains. The reason why this film worked was that the titular woman herself was very rarely shown, a lot of the time her presences would be implied, but crucially she wasn’t shown. As a result, she remains quite a mysterious figure, and that is frightening, the issue will overly showing a villain like this is that by doing it, they become less scary.

That is something that is very true of this film: it just isn’t as scary. It tries to recapture the same creepy atmosphere as the same film and, the same sense of tension, but it can’t. Because we didn’t need this film all of the scares and, everything the Woman In Black does has been done before and better.

I never realised until I watched this film how much we needed Daniel Radcliffe, though he didn’t do anything fantastic, he is heads and shoulders better than the protagonist this time around. Eve is simply a blank slate, she is boring and generic, she has a subplot about how she had her kid taken away from her which draws a parallel with the titular Woman herself, but this is never explored enough to be impactful.

The fight over Edward (Oaklee Pendergast), a young orphan boy, between Eve and, The Woman In Black has no power at all as you don’t care about the protagonist. Whatmore, the end twist being that The Woman In Black is still around and coming for Edward is lazy, and feels like a blatant attempt to set up a sequel, very much like how ‘Sinister 2’ ended.

Overall this is a cash grab sequel if there ever was one, there is nothing new here, it is a far cry from the first film in all the worst ways and proves Daniel Radcliffe’s ability as a leading man.

Cons.
It Pales In Comparison.
The Protagonist is Bland.
It Does Nothing New With The Woman In Black.
It Demystifies The Woman In Black.
You Just Don’t Care.

Pros.
It’s Watchable.
It Has A Few Good Moments.

1.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

The Woman In Black: A Good Ghost Story Is Never Beat

‘Woman In Black’ is a 2012 supernatural horror film: the plot focuses on a young Lawyer called Arthur (Daniel Radcliffe), who goes to Eel March House to settle some business. While he is there, he is terrorised by the menacing Woman In Black. The woman herself is a vengeful spirit, as she took her own life after her son died in an accident; she vowed to “never forget and never forgive” and now she forces local children to take their own lives so that their parents can feel the same pain she felt. Arthur tries to lay her spirit to rest and stop the child suicides.

I remember when this film came out, it was talked about as though it was the scariest thing ever, and as a young teen when I first saw this, I would agree with this consensus. Even now, when I am far older, and I’ve delved further into the murky waters of the horror genre, I would still say this is one of the scariest films I have ever seen.

This is the quintessential British ghost story, there is something so unsettling about this film it is there in the harsh oppressive world of the moors and in the fact that in the shadows is a Woman who will never stop, never be at peace, until you know her pain. The horror works so well in this film because of the fact that the actual Woman In Black herself is very sparingly used, the mere mention of her, or threat of her presence is enough to creep you out.

I can’t think of anything more chilling that the opening scene of this film, wherein 3 young girls all walk out of a window together as The Woman In Black stands by ominously watching; still to this day, that scene will give me goosebumps. The more we learn about The Woman, the more we understand her motivations and see that she is a force of nature rather than something that can be reasoned with.

Daniel Radcliffe does a good job here, in one of his first post Potter projects, he proves here as he does in later films in his filmography that he has a wonderful range and is, in fact, quite a talented actor. We see his character as a beacon of hope fighting back against the seemingly unbeatable forces of darkness and despair.

Overall, this film is a triumph, it is a masterpiece a testament to British horror and to Hammer Horror as well. It is a must-see for all horror fans and anyone else looking for a fright.

Pros.
The Atmosphere.
The Sparing Use Of The Monster.
Daniel Radcliffe.
British Horror.
The Chilling Nature.

Cons.
It Can Be A Bit Slow.

4/5

Reviewed by Luke

The Lighthouse: Descend Into Madness

‘The Lighthouse’ is a psychological horror film: the plot follows two lighthouse keepers Ephraim (Robert Pattinson), and Thomas (Willem Dafoe), who become stranded on an island and slowly begin to question reality and descend into madness.

‘The Lighthouse’ is a hard film to review, I’ve seen it a few times now, and I still don’t understand what is going on. To some, this will add to the joy of the film others will say that is pretentious and up its own arse; I personally would live by the rule if you liked the ‘VVitch’ you will like this. Personally, for me, the ‘VVitch’ is in my top 3 films, and I like Eggers style I like how there are multiple layers to his work that you can sit and think about after the credits roll. I think he is very novel in his approach to not only horror but, cinema as a whole as well.

That said, while I think this film is strong, I don’t think it is as strong as the ‘VVitch’. Eggers first film to me was the perfect storm then right cast, the right setting and the occult and witches are always a great mix. However, this time around something is missing that I can’t quite put my finger on.

It certainly isn’t the setting as I found the bleak deserted island to be haunting which made for a very oppressive atmosphere. I don’t think this film is scary, at least not in the traditional sense, but it is unsettling and creepy throughout; which I enjoyed. A lot of the answers that you can draw from some of the films moments certainly suggest a lot of scary things. Also, what is more, frightening than the idea of madness slowly creeping into your mind?

It isn’t the performances either as both leading men give it their all. Pattinson plays the quiet loner type well and, can also be suitably threatening when the time calls for it. However, his manic performance is upstaged in near every way by Willem Dafoe. Dafoe’s Thomas is a man obsessed with the light, what he sees in the light is never revealed, as such his crazed performance is both captivating, but also somewhat endearing. It is strange as the film devolves into both men being antagonist towards the other and then trying to kill each other, the only one I was rooting for was Dafoe.

The horror themes explored is where I find myself preferring the ‘VVitch’, I think. This film explores the ideas of obsession, isolation and Sea Legends, so things like Mermaids. While I think these are good, they can’t seem to top the ending of Eggers debut film with the devil appearing to tempt Thomasin.

Overall this isn’t the sort of horror film that will have mass appeal if you liked Eggers other work you will like this. A very hard film to score indeed.

Pros.
The Novel Approach.
The Acting.
The Atmosphere.
The Creep Factor.

Cons.
It Can’t Best The ‘VVitch’.

4/5

Reviewed by Luke

The House With A Clock In The Walls: Eli Roth’s Child Friendly Feature

‘The House With A Clock In Its Walls’ is a dark fantasy, horror, comedy film, based on a series of children’s book. The plot follows Lewis (Owen Vaccaro), a recent orphan who moves to live with his uncle Jonathan (Jack Black), when he arrives he realises there is more to his uncle then he ever knew; namely that he is a Warlock. The events that follow are Jonathan and his neighbor Florence (Cate Blanchett), fighting the evil Warlock, that use to be Jonathan’s magic partner and mentor.

This film marks a first for the director Eli Roth this film is Roth’s first film that isn’t out and out a horror film; Roth’s trademark gore is nowhere to been seen here. The strangest thing about this film is that it works quite well, Roth doing children’s dark fantasy seems to be the perfect match; this film feels very Del Toro esque which is the highest compliment I can give.

The horror elements are quite strong here, for a kids film, the gothic sensibilities this film wears on its sleeve are used to wonderful effect. It feels very much in the same vein as Black’s other children’s horror series ‘Goosebumps’, but better. The villain of the film Issac Izard (Kyle Maclachlan), brings with him a genuine sense of menace and threat. His dastardly plot is to turn back time and erase the human race; which is weirdly wonderful.

The central trio of heroes are all mostly great, the weak link is Vaccaro, but that is to be expected. I won’t go on about it too much as it is low hanging fruit to go after a child actor for being the weak part of the film, but he brings very little to the film no charm no charisma nothing.

Blanchett is terrific as Florence, a mater witch who has lost her magical ability as a result of losing her family. The transformation she goes through, which results in her becoming a part of the family is very sweet and affecting. Black also plays the caring uncle, very well he gives it just the right amount of warmth and humour, which makes him the star of the show. Black is also the main person on the comedy front and, he does a great job all of his jokes land well, which make for some great chuckle-inducing moments.

Overall this film is a great turn for Eli Roth as he proved he can do more than just ‘torture porn’, it could also be a great start for a potential franchise of child-friendly gothic horror films; hopefully Black and Blanchett return if they do a sequel.

Pros.
Black.
Blanchett.
The Gothic Horror Elements.
A Surprising Turn For Roth.

Cons.
The Plot Is Daft And Riddled With Plot Holes.

3.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Veronica: The Devil Is In The Detail

‘Veronica’ is a Spanish supernatural horror drama film based loosely off the 1991 Vallecas Case, in which Estefania Guitierzzez Lazaro died strangely after using a ouija board. The film follows the standard possession storyline with the entity growing in strength over time and gaining more of a grip over the girl.

The film is not based 100% on the case as the lead girl is instead called Veronica (Sandra Escacena), and a lot of the events are played up to increase the potential of the scares. However, the case is used as a means to frame this film with a sense of realism.

I had heard a lot of people talking about this film before I saw it, they were all saying good things not just about ‘Veronica’, but about Spanish horror as a whole, which is a rising force in the genre. While this film might not be the scariest film of the year, it is certainly unsettling. This is in large part a result of the style of the film which is quite unlike a lot of other possession films I have previously seen. Whatsmore, the design of the spirit or demon is surprisingly refreshing; it looks both creepy and original.

The scares in this film strong, especially as when it focuses on the Mayan influences and the ideas surrounding the eclipse. When ‘Veronica’ is at its best is when it is being original and novel. The issue with this film is that these bits are few and far between. A lot of this film is very generic and predictable- the story of a girl being possessed by a demon after playing with a Ouija board has been done time and time again. Though this film has creative aspects, it simply isn’t enough to disguise from its average whole.

The acting is mostly good, Escacena is likeable enough and you want to see her beat the demon. Her relationship with her siblings is endearing and the final sacrifice not only makes sense but has emotional weight. That is the best bit about this film; the ending. It chooses to have the protagonist lose which is in keeping with the actual case, but it is still a brave move and one you don’t see coming.

Overall, this film has some moments of real inspiration and has some genuinely good scares, but it is not enough to get over the very average premise that has been done thousands of times before. Still worth checking out.

Pros.
Originality.
Creature Design.
A Good Lead Performance.

Cons.
Average Premise.
It Is Bound By The Fact That It Is Based on True Events.

3/5

Reviewed by Luke

The Babysitter: What Goes On After You Go To Bed.

‘The Babysitter’ is a teen horror-comedy film the plot follows Cole, (Judah Lewis), as he stays up to see what his Babysitter Bee, (Samara Weaving), gets up to when he goes to bed; what he finds out chills him to the bone. Bee and her friends are devil worshipers and, they are using Cole for his blood. Cole and Bee then enter into a showdown to the death that only one of them can walk away from.

For those of you who read my reviews and, follow me on social media, you know that I find Samara Weaving incredibly annoying; it’s her scream. However, this film does something I didn’t think was possible it made me like her, she was charming and, funny and easily the highlight of the film; throughout the film, you think she is going to turn back to the side of the light, but no she is evil through and, through.

The showdowns between Cole and, his perusers are all excellent they are very reminiscent of, ‘Home Alone’ all of Cole’s weapons are improvised and the deaths are spectacularly gory. They manage to capture the tension of the situation while also remaining comic. The comedy in this film is quite good, it will bring a smile to your face and, warm you, towards the characters.

This film is very stylised think Zack Synder or, Edgar Wright, but turn it up to 100; every chance to have a graphic or, do a cinematography trick is taken. The issue with this is that a lot of the time it takes you out of the film, there was a sequence where the camera was moving around, but also supposed to be doing a POV shot and, the effect is incredibly jarring. There is nothing wrong with a film having style, but if anything this film is overly stylised.

Another thing about this film is that it is completely predictable, but that is okay as this film knows what it is, a pulpy horror B movie homage, and it plays to that. Viewing this film through the lens of it being a homage to horror B movies, makes it a much better film than it actually is. As I don’t think it is a horror B movie homage deliberately.

Overall ‘The Babysitter’ feels like something out of a bygone age, it is over stylised and, it seems to be doing all this to overcompensate for the fact that it isn’t very original. However, it is a nice piece of horror movie junk food and, Samara Weaving is excellent.

Pros.
It’s Good Horror Junk Food.
The Genre Diehards Might Find Something To Like.
Samara Weaving is excellent.

Cons.
It Feels Very Dated.
Overly Stylised.

3.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Better Watch Out: A Master Killer In The Making

Better Watch Out is a psychological horror film about a babysitter who is taken, hostage by the child she is babysitting.

I had this on my list of Christmas films to watch, though now having watched it I can safely say it has absolutely nothing to do with the season itself, apart from being set around that time, so this really isn’t a Christmas film.

The plot of the film is incredibly obvious, the audience, as well as Ashley, (Olivia DeJonge), in the film, are supposed to believe that a mysterious unseen force is trying to break into the house to kill Ashley and, the young teen she is babysitting Luke, (Levi Miller). However, it is clear to see from the moment he is introduced that Luke is a bad apple, it is also clear to see that he has an unhealthy fixation with Ashley; making multiple attempts to seduce her.

So when the inevitable twist happens and, it turns out the break-in was staged by Luke and his friend Garrett, (Ed Oxenbould), to once again try and, seduce Ashley it is in no way surprising. What follows then is a series of events that simply couldn’t happen and, the way the film explains Luke getting away with them all is that he is super smart; yet he commits a series of murders without wearing gloves, so he is leaving fingerprints everywhere, and then gets away with it at the end of the film. This to me just reeks of bad, convenient writing.

Whats more Miller is very hateable as a child psychopath who thinks he is the best thing since sliced bread, almost too much so. However, we as an audience are trained to want to see these kinds of people fail and, be punished for there evil ways, but the end of this film subverts, that expectation. Not in a good way that is clever but, rather in a way that is incredibly frustrating and, anti-climatic. The ending is that he gets away with everything because he is so smart; there is a tease of maybe he will get found out, but that is all it is a tease. This film seems to want you to root for Luke, showing how smart he is and, how perfectly planned out he has everything, this feels off especially when the character you should be rooting for Ashley is barely developed, her plot worthy characteristics are who she use to date.

Overall this film is frustrating as it set’s rules and, then 5 minutes later it breaks them. It seems to glorify a budding serial killer, and completely ignore its main character.

Pros
Good Gore
It Is Nice To See The Kid From The Visit Again

Cons
Logic
Miller Is Too Good
The Way The Film Treats Its Main Character

1/5

Reviewed By Luke