Ready Or Not 2: Here I Come (2026)

Anybody keen to be served up a sequel to Ready Or Not is going to be kept happy enough with this, a film helped by the fact that everyone returns to their main roles, both in front of and behind the camera, and by the fact that it seems to be even more gleefully sadistic.

Things pick up immediately from the end point of the first movie. Grace (Samara Weaving) is taken to hospital, soon to be visited by an unhappy estranged sister (Faith, played by Kathryn Newton), who only ends up there because Grace forgot to change her main emergency contact. Nobody believes Grace about the shocking events of the past day, but the worst part of it all is that her ordeal isn't over. Grace AND Faith are snatched, terms are explained by a lawyer (Elijah Wood), and it's time for a whole new bunch of rich and entitled psychopaths to hunt some human prey. They're headed up by Ursula (Sarah Michelle Gellar) and Titus Danforth (Shawn Hatosy), and they are happy to use Faith as leverage to keep Grace in line.

It's clear that Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett returned to this premise because they figured they could have more fun with it. That's exactly what they do, adapting a story about two sisters into something that writers Guy Busick and R. Christopher Murphy could easily fit into the Ready Or Not world. It's a classic case of "here's what you enjoyed, but a little bit more of it", for the most part, and the direction keeps the focus on fun in a way that makes the slightly longer runtime (this is 108 minutes compared to the 95 minutes of the first film) feel just right.

Weaving slips back into her (iconic?) character with ease, and believably becomes more badass and dangerous as she becomes more desperate to stay alive, and keep her sister in the same condition. Newton is a great addition, entertainingly unhappy with her sister, but also soon showing how much they are cut from the same cloth when things start getting bloody and deadly. Gellar and Hatosy have a lot of fun in their roles, and the former always seems very aware of, and respectful of, the genre baggage she will forever carry into any project. Wood is fun, a calm presence in the middle of a lot of madness, and there are good moments for Dan Beirne, Olivia Cheng, Nestor Carbonell, Kevin Durand, Varun Saranga, Nadeem Umar-Khitab, Antony Hall, and even a cameoing David Cronenberg.

Much like the first film, there are no scares here, and there's very little actual tension, but you get some inventive kills and a whole lot of bloodshed. One or two sequences are drawn out into a showcase of violence and pain, many others are all about the hilarity of how quickly some people can be killed when they're not hidden away in a protective bubble. Everything is very enjoyable for those who were eager to rejoin Weaving in another bit of deadly gameplay.

And special recognition has to go to costume designer Avery Plewes on the outstanding dress that makes an important appearance in the very last scenes. You'll know what I'm on about when you see it. It's a stunning look, but also nicely in line with the journey that the main character has been on.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Scream 7 (2026)

I know that I may be in the minority, but I need to remind people that I liked Scream VI. I liked it a lot. It gave me hope for whatever might come along next in the series. And then everything started to go wrong, starting with the poor treatment of Melissa Barrera, which would lead to at least one other main cast member leaving in solidarity. There was also some horrible AI campaign used in the marketing, as well as allowing the brand to be platformed on a major gambling site. I started to lose any enthusiasm I may have had for this. I still had to see it though.

Neve Campbell is back as Sidney, married to a cop named Mark Evans (Joel McHale) and with one teenage daughter (Tatum, played by Isabel May) who resents her over-protective nature. She may not resent it when trying to stay alive though, especially when there seems to be a new Ghostface in town. Someone who claims to be Stu Macher. Gale Weathers (Courteney Cox) arrives just in time to help unmask the killer, or killers, and she now has siblings Mindy Meeks-Martin (Jasmin Savoy Brown) and Chad Meeks-Martin (Mason Gooding) working for her.

The second feature to be directed by writer Kevin Williamson, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Guy Busick, everything here shows why Williamson should perhaps just stick to the writing side of things. Having said that, it also shows that Williamson is nowhere near the sharp and savvy writer he once was, having ensnared himself in a sticky trap of the kind of ridiculous rules and contrivances that he used to be able to freshen up and repurpose to great effect. 

It's sadly ironic that a horror movie franchise that so often played around with the rules and conventions of the genre is now so formulaic. There are things that happen here that any Scream fan will see coming miles away, from the technology used (which everyone knew would explain a number of returning characters) to the third act reveal. And it's an odd choice to now give two characters the "cloak of Dewey invincibility", but here we are.

As stale and lethargic as things have gotten behind the camera, they're equally stale and lethargic in front of it. Campbell looks as if she cannot be bothered going through all of the usual plot beats, Cox is so far removed from the character that she once was (albeit with good reason) that she may as well go the whole hog and just start up the Gale & Sidney Stabby Podcast, and newcomer-to-the-series May doesn't have any of the appeal or grit to care about once she ends up in danger. McHale is a decent addition, both Brown and Gooding continue to work well together, and Jimmy Tatro and Michelle Randolph are really enjoyable in the expected opening sequence. That's it though. Anna Camp doesn't make enough of an impression, Sam Rechner and Asa Germann are absolute non-starters, and it's only Celeste O'Connor and Mckenna Grace who feel like youngsters we may enjoy spending some time with. Then we don't get to spend much time with them. Thank goodness we get some enjoyable line deliveries from Matthew Lillard (portraying what should be referred to as Schrödinger's Stu).

As much as I disliked Scream (2022), I can now see, with hindsight, that it had a bit more going for it than I gave it credit for. The cast, whether you liked them or not, at least had some character and energy throughout. The motivation for the kills was an attempt to do something fun and interesting (whether they succeeded is a different matter entirely). And it felt as if everyone involved tried to have some fun (again, success or failure on that front is subjective). This film, opening sequence aside, doesn't have any sense of fun at all. And a Scream movie without a sense of fun is just a weak slasher that references numerous superior films.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Final Destination: Bloodlines (2025)

I have praised the Final Destination movie series before. Even the worst film in the series manages to be average, as opposed to painfully unbearable, and the last film was a surprisingly great return to form for a series that has consistently tried to deliver bloody fun to horror fans for the past twenty five years. I had mixed feelings about this latest instalment. On the one hand, more Final Destination movies could be a good thing. On the other hand, something bad would start to work against the goodwill that so many have for the series. Unlike the portents glimpsed by our main character here, however, all of the signs seemed good. Directors Zach Lipovsky and Adam Stein seemed to have a real love for the series, as evidenced by their inspired Zoom presentation that ultimately got them the job (read up on it, I hope we get to see it somewhere as a bonus feature one day), and writers Guy Busick and Lori Evans Taylor worked with Jon Watts on a story idea that would apparently please fans and relative newcomers alike. Then we got the marketing, which made great use of imagery associated with the films, particularly that Final Destination 2 opener.

Kaitlyn Santa Juana plays Stefani Reyes, a young woman we first see waking up from a nightmare at the end of a university class. That nightmare feels very real, and Stefani has been having it repeatedly for two months. It's not a premonition though, because it's all happening in the past, but it's odd that the young woman she sees in these visions shares the same name as her estranged grandmother, Iris (played by Brec Bassinger in the visions, and by Gabrielle Rose when shown in the here and now). Stefani starts to question her family about the problems that have kept certain family members away from one another, which leads her to discover a grand design by one Mr. G. Reaper to wipe out all of the lives that weren't supposed to exist if his earlier plan, to kill off a fancy restaurant full of patrons, had come to fruition. Stefani needs to figure out whatever pattern will decide the order of deaths in her family, and she hopes that there's some way to stop that big scythe cutting through their lifelines.

If there's one thing that the Final Destination movies does nowadays, one thing I hope we can all agree on, it puts the fun into funerals. This film leads characters from one tragic death to another, forcing everyone still living to eventually conclude that, yes, they are all being targeted by a vengeful and angry spirit of death. The opening disaster is top-tier stuff, although I would argue that Lipovsky and Stein make a rod for their own backs by starting things off with the kind of Rube Goldberg machinations that are normally saved for individual death scenes later in the runtime. There aren't too many surprises, which is more down to viewers now being familiar with the concept than any creative bankruptcy, but it's good to see that the screenplay at least tries a couple of small rug-pulls, some of which work better than others. Everyone is on the same page when it comes to the tone and delivering what audiences will want to see, and it allows the film to feel like the most self-aware and fun of the series. That doesn't necessarily make it the best, but it gives Lipovsky and Stein some strong cards that they play well. The timing couldn't have been better, considering the growth that you can see through their feature filmography throughout the past 10+ years. 

The cast all do a good job, despite the fact that they know they're just there to be involved in, or witness, memorable death scenes. Juana makes for a good lead, becoming more stressed without leaning too hard into full eye-twitching and head-shaking mode. She conveys the strength that her character needs, but is as vulnerable as everyone else when moving under the shadowy figure looking for ways to help shuffle her off the mortal coil. Teo Briones is a bit less enjoyable, playing her younger brother, Charlie, but that's fine when the film allows us to spend some time with other endangered family members played by Richard Harmon, Owen Patrick Joyner, and Anna Lore. Harmon is a highlight, thanks to the nature of his character and his delivery of some of the best lines in the film. Rya Kihlstedt and Alex Zahara are also dragged into the fatal danger zone, although both April Telek and Tinpo Lee only hang around long enough to witness some of the crazy carnage before they are unceremoniously shunted offscreen. There's also the expected cameo from Tony Todd, as poignant as it is enjoyable this time around due to the fact that it will stand as one of his final film roles. And what a touching send-off from the series it is.

I have criticisms, but they feel very minor when I consider how much I enjoyed this. The quality of the special effects varies wildly, especially in the CGI-heavy opening sequence, there are some inconsistencies with how things were laid out earlier in the series (easy enough to overlook though, and I am willing to consider that previous theories were put forward by people who didn't know they were mistaken), and the fact that we're supposed to believe that someone would shelter away from death in a house surrounded by multiple literal death-traps is an oversight that I wish they had managed to correct before getting the final draft of the screenplay written. I still had more fun with this at the cinema than almost any other horror movie I can think of in years. It's a crowd-pleaser, and I encourage absolutely everyone to get along and see it in the cinema if they can. It was made to be experienced with people communally enjoying the way it deftly dances between the humour and the bloodshed.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Abigail (2024)

I am going to have to make a decision here, whether to include some spoilers in this review or not. Although I would normally work hard to avoid spoilers, Abigail has arguably already been spoiled for you if you have seen the trailer or some of the alternate poster designs. I understand why. It makes more sense to draw in the horror crowd it is aimed at, which wouldn’t necessarily happen if it was sold to look like a straightforward crime thriller. So . . . I am going to discuss it as if it is a pretty straightforward crime thriller, but I am assuming that you will all be aware of the fact that it is more than that.

Things start with a kidnapping. Six people work together to snatch a little girl (Abigail, played by Alisha Weir) before driving to an isolated country home where they have to stay holed up for 24 hours. If all goes well then the payday is $50M. All isn’t about to go well though. It turns out that not only is Abigail’s father very rich, but he is also very powerful and dangerous. And Abigail may share a few of his traits. 

Written by Stephen Shields and Guy Busick, this is a very smart and funny horror comedy that makes a lot of things very obvious from the opening titles (for those familiar with the music cue). The twists and turns aren’t presented as major rug-pulls, nothing here will surprise fans of the tropes being played with, but they keep being thrown into the plot with a sense of glee, curveball after curveball for our main characters to deal with. With directors Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett at the helm (directors of the last two Scream movies, as well as the very enjoyable Ready Or Not), everyone going into this should have an idea of what they are getting into. It’s playful, it’s bloody, and it’s a fresh take on some very familiar material.

The cast are all on the same page, happy to fit into their archetypes and just allow themselves to be part of a group that descends into chaos as everything around them starts going wrong. Melissa Barrera is much better here than she was in the Scream movies, making for a great central character to root for, and Dan Stevens is having a whale of a time as the cold-blooded leader of the group. Kevin Durand and Kathryn Newton are much simpler, more sweet-hearted characters (relatively speaking), and both Angus Cloud and William Catlett do well in their respective roles, even if they seem less important to the group than some of the others. Everyone is a bag of clichés, but it doesn’t matter when they are being used in such a fun way. Weir is the star though, and proves more than capable at conveying the many different moods her character goes through during the unraveling of the kidnapping scheme. It is also worth mentioning a couple of excellent cameo turns from Giancarlo Esposito and Matthew Goode.

Unabashedly profane and bloody throughout, Abigail is the most fun I have had with a mainstream American horror movie in a hell of a long time. It’s well-paced, it looks gorgeous throughout (even as the sets become drenched in blood), it’s inventive, and there are numerous easter eggs dotted throughout that can be enjoyed or ignored without changing how you feel about the rest of the film. All in all, it’s a bloody good time for fans of those involved.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Scream VI (2023)

For as much as I love most of the Scream movies, including the fun Scream 4, I was absolutely not a fan of Scream (2022) aka 5cream. That immediately became my new least favourite in the franchise (not including the first season of the TV show) and I wasn’t looking forward to this next instalment AKA Ghostface Takes Manhattan.

Thankfully, being a completist is sometimes a good thing. I am glad I watched Scream VI, and it’s already one of my favourites (with my provisional ranking just now being 1, 4, 6, 2, 3, and 5). It’s far from perfect, and I still have issues with the core cast, but the set-pieces and the general vibe of the film, which feels a bit more relaxed and less reflexive and defensive than the last outing, works really well.

The premise is simple. A bunch of people who survived the last film are now in New York. Ghostface is also in New York. People are going to start being stabbed. That’s it. Red herrings abound (or do they?) as our leads try to pinpoint who is doing the murdering, and maybe figure out a way to stop them.

Although there’s one notable omission from the cast (no Neve Campbell this time around), everyone returns to their main role behind the camera. Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett co-direct, and the script is from both James Vanderbilt and Guy Busick. While that may not seem like a good thing to anyone who disliked the last movie, and I realise I am very much in the minority with my dislike of that film, it’s good to see how much better everyone does while feeling less beholden to everything that came along beforehand. This generally seems more free to properly subvert expectations and play around with the rules viewers think they are so familiar with, as evidenced in an opening sequence that is the best opener since the classic start of the first movie.

It is easier to enjoy the cast a bit more too, having accompanied a number of them through the events of the last movie, but this is the biggest problem that the film has. The supporting players are the most enjoyable (Hayden Pannetiere makes a welcome return, Dermot Mulroney is decent, and Courteney Cox has a confrontation worthy of her character’s status), and both Mason Gooding and Jasmin Savoy Brown are fine, not to mention one or two others caught up in the midst of the killing spree by virtue of being friends with the targeted group, but Jenna Ortega is left with less to do than she deserves, and Melissa Barrera continues to just not be a very appealing nominal lead. Sorry, there’s no way around the fact that she’s dead weight at the heart of this rebooted phase of the franchise.

The other problem with the film is a sad lack of commitment to actually, well, killing off characters. So many people are savagely attacked here that you will be forgiven for rolling your eyes during the third act when you see how many actually make it to the end credits. There are fantastic sequences, but some of them feel ultimately inconsequential. I still hold out hope for the next film through. Considering how big a step up in quality this one was, I can only hope that everyone involved finds the bravery to start gorily whittling down the core cast next time around. And if that is caused by another “legacy” character, all the better, because these film-makers certainly seem to have taken note of fan theories and internet gossip.

There are at least four great sequences that help to make this a memorable Scream film, and the fact that I didn’t feel the rest of the film pale into comparison after such a strong start is about as good a compliment as I can give it. It’s an unexpected return to form, as playful and violent as you could hope, with the extra fun of watching the parallel strands between this new trilogy and the original three movies come into sharp focus in a way that provides one more layer to a film series known for being so self-aware and self-referential.

I cannot wait to rewatch this. And, AND, I may even finally work up some enthusiasm to rewatch the last film. Maybe I will like it a little bit more. Maybe.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5q_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Scream (2022)

Is anyone else getting as tired as I am of the formulaic way so many franchises have been "reinvigorated" over the past few years? Find some way to ensure the film connects to the original. Have at least one character from the first movie to help push those nostalgia/familiarity buttons. Make up for any weak plotting and poor scripting with some extra FX work. Oh, and have one big surprise, or death, that doesn't really feel all that surprising. Horror movies get a bonus for allowing a central character from the original to face their fear while showing how the trauma of being stalked by a crazed killer has affected their life. From the Star Wars movies to the Halloween movies, and now Scream, this is the way it works. I WAS looking forward to the next instalment in the wildly uneven The Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise, but now I am not so optimistic. 

Scream starts, funnily enough, with a phone ringing. A young girl, Tara (Jenna Ortega), is attacked in her home. That attack brings her sister, Sam (Melissa Barrera), back home to Woodsboro. Sam is with her boyfriend, Richie (Jack Quaid), and she introduces him to a group of sort-of-friends that includes Amber (Mikey Madison), Wes (Dylan Minnette), twins Mindy Meeks-Martin (Jasmin Savoy Brown) and Chad Meeks-Martin (Mason Gooding), and Liv (Sonia Ammar). Everyone wants to survive the latest potential ghostface killings, but everyone is also a suspect. That's why Sam gets in touch with Dewey Riley (David Arquette), who subsequently warns Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell) and Gale Weathers (Courteney Cox) to stay far away. 

The first film in the Scream movie series to be directed by anyone other than Wes Craven, and the second script not written by Kevin Williamson, this is a film that very much highlights the lack of both of these talents behind the camera. Not that directors Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett are bad. I've enjoyed most of their work before this, to varying degrees, and they stay firmly in control of the mechanics of the film, as it were, with the actual visuals and editing here being the least of the problems with the film. The overall feel of the film still lacks something though, that confidence and playfulness that Craven could wind through all of his better works. That is never more apparent than in a sequence that should be playful and fun, with the frame being blocked in ways that leads viewers to expect a jump scare at any moment, but instead ends up irritating and tiresome as it plays the same trick in a couple of different ways.

Never mind the directors though, especially when the writers, James Vanderbilt and Guy Busick, have to shoulder almost all of the blame for how bad this is. It's probably easier for me to list my criticisms of the script here in a series of bullet points.

* A distinct lack of tension. In attempting to feel fun and unpredictable, the writers made this arguably the most predictable, and therefore boring, entry in the series. So far.

* A killer so obvious that I really hoped my gut feeling was wrong. It wasn't. I saw the end of this thing coming a mile away. That's down to sloppy writing, whether it's to do with just dismissing characters until they start to become more prominent when you know the final reveal is due or interactions between characters that feel like they're pointing a neon-lit arrow at someone.

* The meta commentary here is awful, and I mean AWFUL. This is, in certain ways, very similar to The Matrix Resurrections, but that film showed how you could do super-smart commentary on events that also discuss the very film you are watching without feeling like a lecture delivered by idiots misunderstanding the appeal of their own source material.

* As subjective as it is, a lot of the humour doesn't work. I would also argue that a lot of the new characters don't work, but I'd say it's about a 50/50 with who I liked and who I didn't (although not liking the new lead is a big stumbling block).

* There's one character depicted in "visions" here, and it's a very bad move. It's usually best to leave that trope to Stephen King, who has used it so often that it's part of his comforting appeal when I read his stories.

* Putting even more emphasis on the Stab films, but without the wit or fun cameos that have been there in previous excerpts from the film-within-the-film series.

* As difficult as it is to confirm the feeling in my gut, the characters generally feel dumber in this film. Being so easily separated, being fooled by tech that should surely be avoided, and turning up somewhere after being specifically warned to stay away. These things have always happened in the Scream movies, and many other horror movies, but characters used to end up reluctantly "breaking the rules" as dangerous situations forced them to make difficult decisions in the heat of the moment.

Do the writers get anything right, in between silly moments like showcasing the "Randy Meeks Memorial Home Theater"? Yes. It's a shame that they can only deal with the characters of Sidney Prescott and Gale Weathers by merging them into some kind of symbiotic Laurie Strode-alike, but they do a lot better by Dewey Riley, giving Arquette some of the best scenes that he's had in the series. I also liked Quaid's character, the easy interplay between Brown and Gooding, and the fact that we had a bit more time with Sheriff Judy Hicks (played by Marley Shelton, reprising her character that I enjoyed in Scream 4).

Arquette is the heart of the film, which leads to the presence of Campbell and Cox feeling much more forced (despite it being obvious that they need to come into the picture at some point). Barrera and Ortega are disappointing, considering that viewers spend so much time with them. The former has to handle some of the more ludicrous moments, not really her fault, and the latter just doesn't feel like an important part of the cast once that opening sequence has finished. Quaid has enough charm and likability to make the most of his role, and I've just mentioned the enjoyability of Brown and Gooding in the last paragraph. Madison, Ammar and Minnette are there to make up the numbers, and there are a couple of enjoyable cameos to watch out for, as well as one awful one.

I won't deny that I enjoyed sitting in a cinema and hearing "Red Right Hand" accompanying some Woodsboro scenery, and there are a few bits of fairly graphic brutality that at least make Ghostface seem even more driven and vicious this time around, but I was very unhappy by the time the end credits rolled. Some have already been celebrating the fact that a sequel to this has already been greenlit. I would prefer if the series provided one last big twist, and just left an iconic killer to stay dead and buried now that the film-makers seem to have nowhere else to take the story.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Ready Or Not (2019)

If you haven't seen Ready Or Not yet then what have you been up to? Oh, I get it, you have just been too busy, like myself, dealing with life stuff. It's not always easy to get along to the cinema, even when something is being raved about, as this was.

Samara Weaving plays Grace, a young woman who is taken to the family home by her hubby-to-be, Alex (Mark O'Brien). The wedding arrangements allow for the usual mix of friendliness, civility, barbed comments, and resentment, but things take a turn for the worse when Grace is asked that evening to draw a card, one which will decide on a game the family has to play. She draws one that says "hide and seek", and it turns out that this means the family has to hunt and kill her before sunrise, or they believe they will be struck by a deadly curse.

Directed by the talented duo of Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett, Ready Or Not is a fun and bloody romp (yes, I used the word romp here - deal with it) that is boosted by a few select talented cast members helping to raise the material. The canny casting is essential, as what could have been a sharp and witty script is surprisingly weak. Guy Busick and Ryan Murphy (AKA R. Christopher Murphy) do a good job of getting everyone into place and delivering the little morsels of exposition throughout, but they fail to do enough to raise this above a number of similar genre films from recent years (including the enjoyable Mayhem, which also starred Weaving). For those who have seen the film and don't agree with me at all, I'd like you to consider a) whether or not you enjoyed certain characters because of how they acted or because of who was portraying them, and b) how much worse this would have been with someone in the main role who didn't have the charisma of Weaving.

Fortunately, we DO have the charisma of Weaving, who seems to have been poised on the very edge of proper stardom for a couple of years now. She's consistently brilliant in this, moving believably from someone understandably freaked out by events to someone determined to survive. O'Brien is okay as the love of her life, despite showing no hint of what someone might see in him. Thankfully, you get a wonderfully wry turn from Adam Brody, trying to stay drunk while he wearies of the family traditions, Henry Czerny is superb as the patriarch of the family, and Andie MacDowell is amusingly unfazed by anything that happens. Her role may be a relatively small one, but it's her best in some time.

What works here is the commitment to lining up the gory surprises as people are killed off, one by one, some of them directly involved in the whole scheme and some of them just "innocent" bystanders. Plenty of blood is spattered over people, with most of it ending up on Weaving, and there's a nice balance of moments to make you wince and moments to make you laugh aloud, but I would once again emphasise that it all seems to work as well as it does thanks to the direction and the way the main players sell it.

A good time is guaranteed for most genre fans, but if you have cast your net far and wide in the past year then I'll be very surprised if this ends up as your absolute favourite horror of 2019. It might even be struggling to get into a Top 5 for some voracious cinephiles.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews