The Witcher: A New Fantasy King Rises

The Witcher is a fantasy drama series based on the novels by Andrzej Sapkowski. The plot of the series revolves around Geralt of Rivia (Henry Cavill), a Witcher, a mutant who hunts monsters. Over the course of the series we see Geralt try to escape destiny and his responsibility towards Princess Cirilla (Freya Allan), a child whose fate is tied to Geralt’s through the law of surprise. The series builds to these two characters meeting.

I have to say before I get into this review, I am a huge Witcher fan, I love the games and the books. So, I had been eagerly awaiting this series for quite some time. This series does play homage to both of these, that have come before, taking elements from both. I would say it probably leans more towards the books in terms of faithfulness.

When I first saw him on screen, I wasn’t quite sure how I felt about Cavill as Geralt, but he did grow on me overtime. I think Cavill did a good job as the character and I can’t wait to see where he takes the character in the next season. I think he especially did a good job with the voice; he sounds just like the voice actor from the game; if you close your eyes and listen you will see what I mean.

The breakout star of the series for me is Anya Chalotra as Yennefer, who did a great job. Yennefer is the love of Geralt’s life, and their relationship is a huge part of the series. I think the writing of her character was quite weak in the first few episodes, but when she becomes a full-fledged Mage in about episode 2 or 3, she becomes far more engaging.

The world of this show is fantastic it is deep and rich, it is easily one of the best fantasy worlds ever brought to the small screen. The story is told in 3 separate sequences that all take place outside of one another. Geralt has one, Ciri has one and Yennefer has one, they all come together in episode 6, but before that it can be a bit confusing to figure out what is happening and when; on second watch it all makes a lot more sense.

Overall, this is one of Netflix’s best new shows and can easily fill the void left behind by things like Game Of Thrones. If you’re a fan of the games or the books or just fantasy in general, you will love this series and it is definitely one to watch!

Ps. The fight sequences are a thing of beauty.

Pros.

A Solid Lead.

A Rich Developed World.

Multi Layered Characters.

A Loving Homage.

Anya Chalotra Is The Breakout Star.

Cons.

The Out Of Sequence Story Telling Can Be Confusing.

4.5/5

Reviewed By Luke

Velvet Buzzsaw: An Exercise In Pretension

‘Velvet Buzzsaw’ is a satirical supernatural horror film written and directed by Dan Gilroy. The plot of the film revolves around a collection of painting that is both captivating and deadly; there is something alive within the paintings that either kills people or makes them kill themselves. The film also serves to lambast and spoof the art world.

Before I get into this review, I want to say that ‘Nightcrawler’ Gilroy’s other work with Jake Gyllenhaal is a masterpiece, being able to really show off its dark sensibilities and mustering a fantastic performance from Gyllenhaal. There is something about ‘Nightcrawler’ that makes it alarming every time you see it, even though by that point you know how it ends.

The same can’t be said for ‘Velvet Buzzsaw’. My main issue with this film is how up its own arse it is, it seems to think it is the best film that you will see all year; which it isn’t. The satirical elements of the film fail so much so, that I wasn’t even aware it was supposed to be that way until I sat down to research this review. The only thing that might clue you into the fact that this is supposed to be satirical is the fact that all the characters are deeply unlikeable; though I thought that was just bad writing.

Rene Russo and Gyllenhaal try their best and give good performances, which serve as a saving grace for this film, but only barely. The rest of the cast are terrible, Toni Collette’s performance has zero energy and feels like she is trying to give a bad performance for whatever reason. Zawe Ashton has one facial expression for the whole film and to call her wooden would be generous and ‘Stranger Things’ own Natalia Dyer feels like she is only in the film on Netflix’s behest to try and get more people to be like, “oh she was in Stranger Things I should probably rewatch that”.

The horror concepts of this film are interesting and there are a few good scares peppered throughout. However, they just aren’t enough, this film is 20 per cent inspired horror and then 80 per cent lost up its own arse as to how good it is; which is a terrible shame as I was excited to watch a film from the writer-director behind Nightcrawler and his strange, but always excellent muse Jake Gyllenhaal.

Overall this is an exercise in pretension that falls flat whilst also being incredibly hollow.

Pros.

Jake Gyllenhaal Is Always Fantastic.

Some Good Horror Moments.

An Interesting Concept.

Cons.

The Terrible Cast.

The Smug Sense Of Self This Film Has.

2.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

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 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

The Ring: Remaking The Japanese Classic

‘The Ring’ is a supernatural horror film serving as a western retelling of the J Horror masterpiece Ringu. The film stars Naomi Watts as Rachel Keller, a journalist who investigates a killer videotape that supposedly kills you in seven days; the more she dives into the mystery surrounding this tape the more she learns of the ungodly activities that made it in the first place.

Before we get started, I just want to say that I didn’t find this film scary. No, it isn’t because I think the horror elements are weak rather that when I was young, I use to watch the hell out of the ‘Scary Movie’ films and, the third film serves as a parody of this film and, I can’t unassociate the two in my head; I can’t think of one without thinking of the other, so it isn’t scary for me.

There will be a group of people who won’t like this film, not because of its quality, but because they see this after yet another remake of a foreign language horror film and, that we don’t need this film when we have the fantastic Japanese original that we can all watch. To that, I would say both are good, the original the better but, this film still has great moments.

The horror elements are strong, I especially love the inescapable capture of the curse itself; even at the end of the film when Rachel thinks she’s beaten it, she hasn’t. Thus the futility of the characters’ struggles makes this film far more interesting to me.
Moreover, the mystery aspects of the film are also surprisingly strong, you come for the creepy ghost girl scares, you stay for the gripping mystery behind the tape that leaves you with more questions than answers.

The actors all do a serviceable job but, their characters are left weak and, underdeveloped; they fall prey to what is extensively the crux of the horror genre, the decision to either focus on the characters who are being scared or, the scares themselves. A lot of horror films this one included decide to focus more on the monster, to establish them, this can lead to some incredibly memorable villains: but the heroes are usually left flat. ‘Sinister’ a film that is quite similar to this is a great example of what I’m talking about: the film spends a lot of time telling you about Bughull and, his mythology but, then tells us very little about Ethan Hawke’s protagonist aside from a few details about his family and, that he is a true-crime writer.

Overall this is a very good western adaption of a Japanese classic, the scares and, mythology are fantastic and, add many extra layers of detail to the film. The one fault is that the protagonists who you’re supposed to root for are as blank as a piece of paper.

Pros.
Good Scares
Good Mythology
Well Adapted

Cons.
Focusing on the scares and the monster to the detriment of the hero.

4/5

Reviewed by Luke

The Last Exorcism: A Preacher Heads Down To Louisiana

‘The Last Exorcism’ is a found footage supernatural horror film about Preacher Cotton Marcus, (Patrick Fabian), a man who has lost his faith in exorcism after reading about how a young boy lost his life during one, as a result of this Cotton tries to make a documentary film exposing the practice for the sham he believes it to be. While doing this Cotton meets Nell, (Ashley Bell), a young woman who believes she is possessed by the Devil.

‘The Last Exorcism’ is special, in a sea of possession film each more alike than the next this film stands out and, it is not just because it has a unique gimmick in its documentary-style as this was during the found footage craze, no no the thing that makes this film so good is that for a good 85% of the film you don’t know whether Nell actually is possessed or if she has been the victim of abuse and, as a result, is mentally unwell.

The horror sequences in the film are incredibly strong, Horror Master Eli Roth was heavily involved with the making of this film and, it is clear to see. However, this film does not suffer from Roth’s, often criticised, overuse of gore; instead, it builds its scares through character and, the atmosphere.

Said characters are well done mainly Cotton, Nell and, Nell’s father Louis, (Louis Herthum), are the ones I would single out for praise. Fabian makes for an excellent preacher as well as a conman he also delivers a masterful performance in the film’s third act when his faith is proven to be true; he makes for a thought-provoking lead. Bell does incredibly well in her portrayal of Nell capturing her childlike innocence but, also being a believable physical threat in the possession sequences being not only creepy but, menacing as well; which makes for a nice duality.
Herthum’s praise comes as a result of a sequence when he pursues Cotton and, co around the farm with a gun this one sequence is more tense and, nervewracking then all the possession scenes that follow; which isn’t to say they aren’t scary as well.

The ending of the film as well also helps to add a nice sense of hopelessness to the film, suggesting the idea that no matter what Cotton did it was always going to end the same way; which personally I greatly enjoyed.

Overall this is an underrated horror gem, often discounted by people thinking, “oh this is just another possession film”, but if you watch this film and, give it a chance you will see that it is one of the finest horror films of recent memory.

4.5/5

Reviewed by Luke