Shudder Saturday: Dolly (2025)

I didn't expect much from Dolly. I was hoping for something grimy and entertaining, and maybe interspersed with some impressively brutal violence. What I got, unfortunately, was absolute trash. There's nothing here for most horror fans to enjoy, one good gore gag aside, and at least one particular element is so implausible and laughably mishandled that I wondered at one point if I would have enjoyed the whole thing more if I viewed it as a comedy. 

Macy (Fabianne Therese) and Chase (Seann William Scott) are in an isolated woodland area when they encounter the titular character of Dolly. Dolly wears a porcelain mask, likes to abuse and kill people, and also wants someone she can treat like a baby. Macy is the latest person she wants to coddle. That's all you need to know.

Directed by Rod Blackhurst, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Brandon Weavil, Dolly seems to be an expansion on their 2022 short, Babygirl. Although I haven't seen that yet, I'd be surprised if I didn't prefer it to this tiresome attempt to overstretch something that doesn't really have enough meat on the bones to make it worthy of a feature runtime. This may only clock in at 83 minutes, but every minute of it is a painful experience, and not in a good way.

Therese doesn't get to do anything good with her character, being put into the role of the struggling victim far too early, Scott struggles to overcome the inherent silliness of what happens to his character throughout the film, and all Max the Impaler has to do, in the role of Dolly, is ensure the mask stays on and they're grimly determined to maintain a situation that keeps them happy, even while anyone else around them is miserable. Ethan Suplee tries to do a bit more with what he's given, but he's unable to make viewers forget that his character has been portrayed much better in a number of other films in this vein.

I cannot stress enough how worthless this film is, and I'd be very surprised to hear from anyone outwith the cast and crew who decided to champion it. There's no originality, scenes seemingly designed for pure shock value end up being as hilariously mishandled as so many other elements, and it's almost as if Blackhurst and Weavil approached the material with a complete feeling of disdain for those who would be most likely to check it out.

I'll give it a couple of points for the fact that it was made, and made with a general level of technical competence, but that's it. Almost every decision, from the development of the main killer to the pointless structuring that presents the tale in a number of different chapters, is wrong. You can make the right decision by choosing not to watch it.

2/10

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

Shudder Saturday: Pet (2016)

For some reason, and I genuinely don't know why, I have owned Pet for years. I think it may have just been on sale for a cheap enough price that I bundled it with some other purchases, perhaps having heard some good word on it from horror movie fans. It never really appealed to me though, not as a viewing choice to put ahead of the many other films I have still to get to. I changed that this week, and I'm actually glad that I did. 

This is good stuff. It's more interesting and better than the last movie I saw from this director (Apartment 143 AKA Emergo). And maybe my willingness to now recommend it to others reflects those who once recommended it to me.

Dominic Monaghan plays Seth, a young man who works in an animal control facility. He's a bit strange and awkward, to put it mildly, and turns a chance encounter with a former high school crush (Holly, played by Ksenia Solo) into a time for some obsessive and stalkery behaviour. He's not exactly subtle with his attempts to encounter Holly, and seems to want to take her away from the world and keep her as his pet. There's a bit more to it though, as revealed when Seth discusses exactly what he has seen during his observations, and Holly admits to past traumatic events involving her on-off boyfriend, Eric (Nathan Parsons), and her friend, Claire (Jennette McCurdy).

Writer Jeremy Slater does not have the most inspiring filmography. You could charitably call it a bit of a mess, with his best work coming from his TV output, where he has worked on both The Exorcist and The Umbrella Academy. Pet is his best feature to date though, and it benefits from great plotting throughout that allows the characters to be shown as so much more as villain/victim or captor/captive. It's always clear that Seth is dangerous, but equally clear that Holly is the one person who would be most capable of shocking him back to some kind of sanity.

Carles Torrens directs everything without having to overdo the bloodshed or shocks. This isn't focused on torture or sadism, although those elements appear. It's a character study, with the two main characters facing up to what they each see reflected back at them from the other person. It would work in a number of different ways, but Torrens can be thankful that he also had some main cast members able to work so well with the material.

Monaghan is very good in his role, managing to seem creepy and dangerous even as he battles his own insecurities and nerves. Solo is excellent opposite him, trying to figure out the best way to react to the man who has her caged, and soon showing that their respective appearances don't necessarily represent their actual power dynamic. McCurdy is a welcome presence, although not around for very long, Parsons does just fine, and the other people to note are Da'Vone McDonald (playing a security guard named Nate) and Sean Blakemore (a detective who has to ask Seth a few questions as suspicions start to arise about someone who goes missing from his workplace).

Starting off like a hundred other movies you could list, Pet turns into something much smarter and darker than expected, thanks to Slater's screenplay and the work of everyone involved in getting everything onscreen. It's an impressive, and impressively nasty, little film that doesn't just go down the expected dark alleyways. I encourage everyone to give it a watch. 

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

Shudder Saturday: Relaxer (2018)

Intrigued by the premise of Relaxer, I enthusiastically decided to watch it as what I thought was a fairly new release, ignorant of the fact that it was actually first released about eight years ago. That doesn't mean that it was always in this final form, of course, but it certainly seems to have spent some time "in the wild" before receiving any kind of wider and more mainstream release. I don't think there will be too many people who view it as any kind of hidden gem.

Joshua Burge plays Abbie, a man who has been challenged by his brother, Cam (David Dastmalchian), to stay seated on a couch until he has defeated a mythical, apparently unbeatable, final level of Pac-Man. Oh, it's also coming up to Y2K, which surely means an apocalypse is looming. Or maybe the apocalypse will be on a much smaller scale, perhaps just a sofa covered in soda stains and bodily excretions.

Written and directed by Joel Potrykus, Relaxer is, ironically, so relaxed about presenting any kind of narrative that it gives viewers nothing to be invested in. The main character could have been amusingly laid back and surrounded by some kind of force field of calm, but he instead comes across as nothing more than a whiny man-baby, locked in a situation of his own making and somehow doing everything he can to make his environment as bad as it can be.

Things start well enough, I guess, with Dastmalchian and Burge having a good bit of interplay, one brother constantly ribbing the other one while he attempts a challenge on a Tony Hawks skateboarding videogame, but it all goes downhill very quickly once Dastmalchian leaves the screen, leaving viewers alone with Burge, who isn't able to add anything interesting to his character. One or two others eventually appear onscreen, but all they do is indulge the behaviour of someone who really needs to be given a swift kick up the backside.

It's obvious that Potrykus thought he came up with an amusing premise, and clearly figured that keeping things set in the one apartment would be good for the budget, but it's not enough to sustain a feature. Not even close. The 91-minute runtime feels as if it overruns by at least an hour. This should have been an anthology segment, at most, or simply tweaked to create a better reason for Abbie having to stay rooted to his sofa (an accident, a trap, anything other than just "that's the challenge").

There's a decent little "punchline" at the very end of the film, but it doesn't make up for the time spent watching so little happen throughout the rest of the runtime. Even the actual videogaming itself never feels realistic, which might seem a petty thing to complain about, but feels crucial as it's such a major factor in the slight plot.

Awful stuff. *insert Pac-Man dying noise here* 

2/10

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

Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die (2026)

There's no way that this should have been as bad as it was, considering the talent involved. I have enjoyed a couple of other recent movies from writer Matthew Robinson, and I've also been a fan of Gore Verbinski. A cast that includes Sam Rockwell, Juno Temple, and Zazie Beetz? Sign me up. Alas, this is a half-developed decent idea in search of a much better movie.

Rockwell plays a man who bursts into a diner, reveals that he's wired up to explode, and claims to be from the future. Everything has gone horribly wrong in the future, but Rockwell just needs to find the right group of people to help him save them all from a powerful AI overlord. That group of people ends up including Susan (Temple), Ingrid (Haley Lu Richardson), Mark (Peña), Janet (Beetz), Scott (Asim Chaudhry), Marie (Georgia Goodman), and Bob (Daniel Barnett). Each one of these individuals has something to make them an essential part of the plan, hopefully.

There are so many interesting ways this could have gone. You have potential timeloops, you have evil tech that might be able to tap into unlimited power, and you have Sam bloody Rockwell in a starring role. Unfortunately, the only one of those three things to work here is Rockwell, who gives another performance so enjoyable that I wish he would get more star vehicles worthy of his considerable talent.

Robinson does very little with the screenplay, apparently ensuring that the whole thing can be made with a reasonably low budget. I understand his thinking there, especially when the premise is so bonkers that you know it's not going to be breaking any box office records, but limited resources is no excuse for limiting creativity. Just look at any great sci-fi or horror movie made by people who often had a lot less to work with.

Verbinski doesn't seem to know what to do. It's been a while since he's had to show some self-restraint, perhaps he's forgotten how to do it. Perhaps he was never able to do it in the first place. There are certainly some moments in the second half of the film that show him making some horrible decisions that highlight failings in the screenplay. Robinson may have handed in a weak framework, but Verbinski moves it all around and ensures that it will collapse under the weight of his directorial additions.

Aside from Rockwell's winning turn at the centre of the madness, Temple, Richardson, Peña, and Beetz all do very well with what they're given, as do Chaudhry, Goodman, and Barnett, although they are given a bit less. Tom Taylor is also good, and given the chance to show a fair bit of range with the events that befall his character, while many others fill out the supporting cast without being given any chance to make a strong impression amidst numerous scenes that are often too busy and chaotic.

The 134-minute runtime is overlong, especially with a final sequence that proves to be so unsatisfying, and I struggle to think of anything to recommend here, the cast notwithstanding. I guess the title applies just as much to viewers as it does to the film, but it's only the last two words that I suspect most people will be able to follow as instructions.

3/10

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

Netflix And Chill: 30 Days Of Night: Dark Days (2010)

I first watched 30 Days Of Night: Dark Days about ten years ago, and I remembered it being okay. It just wasn't 30 Days Of Night. That's fine. There's no need to compare a movie to any movie it is remaking or sequelising. Usually. I wasn't feeling as kindly towards the film this time around though. It may not be 30 Days Of Night, but it really wants to use that film to gain some goodwill that it cannot earn by itself.

Starting off immediately after the events of the first movie, Stella (now played by Kiele Sanchez) is spending her time trying to inform the public of the vampire menace, and she has an effective way of dealing with any that may turn up to see her at any of her speaking engagements. There are still too few people who believe her, but she's eventually approached by Paul (Rhys Coiro), Amber (Diora Baird), and Todd (Harold Perrineau). They know how things really are, and the big threat is coming from a powerful vampire named Lilith (Mia Kirshner).

Co-written by Steve Niles and director Ben Ketai, the former also being a main creator of the comic and the latter having worked on some of the different TV shows developed from the property, this is a disappointingly dull affair. It aims to stay true to the tone of the first film, but has neither the budget nor the talent to even come close to it. I don't know why they didn't just decide to use the name recognition on something that could have been a blend of entertaining and over the top bites and bloodshed.

There are some great people in the cast here, and every single one of them is sadly wasted. Sanchez cannot make up for the fact that she's not Melissa George, but Coiro, Baird, and Perrineau deserved much better. The same goes for Kirshner, hampered by the vampire makeup required for her character. There's even a small role here for Katharine Isabelle, but viewers will forget she was in it by the time the end credits roll. That's no way to treat Isabelle. Ben Cotton is treated better, playing a vampiric ally named Dane, and Troy Ruptash is good value as Agent Norris, someone working on behalf of Lilith and co.

When it comes right down to it, there's nothing here that will appeal to those lured in by the 30 Days Of Night "branding". Everything, from the production design to the score to at least one of the lead performances, is disappointingly lacklustre. Everyone involved had a chance to do something interesting, but they went for the safest option instead. Hell, I would have given this a bonus point if it had just taken us right back to Alaska and shown us a complete underground city of vampires all biding their time until the next extended period of night-time.

Ironically, the only thing here that comes close to feeling like 30 days is the 92-minute runtime. Toothless and worthless, although I'll always give bonus points for some of the cast members (Baird, Kirshner, Perrineau, and Isabelle). 

3/10

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

 

Shudder Saturday: The Mortuary Assistant (2026)

When I saw the trailer for The Mortuary Assistant a few weeks ago I thought it would be something I would enjoy. It looked enjoyably creepy and entertaining. I had no idea that it was based on a videogame of the same name. To be fair, it doesn't feel like a videogame movie. I am mentioning the source material here for those who may be even more inclined to see it due to an already-established connection.

Directed by Jeremiah Kipp, who has already helmed a few other features in amongst the many shorts that make up the majority of his filmography, this is the tale of a young woman, Rebecca (Willa Holland), who starts a new job in a mortuary and soon finds herself surrounded by dark and demonic forces aiming to hurt and destroy her. The situation seems to be known to her boss (played by Paul Sparks), and it's almost like a rite of passage if she can survive her first night on the job.

Co-written by Tracee Beebe and Brian Clarke, the latter responsible for the videogame, what you get here is an atmospheric horror film that spoils things by moving far too quickly between what could be real and what could be imagined. Horror can often make use of vivid imaginations in an effective and tense way, especially when a character is so disorientated that they end up walking themselves into potential danger, but it needs to be done with care, and I think it works best when used sparingly, unless the overall effect is one of spiralling insanity. The Mortuary Assistant starts the shenanigans so quickly, and refuses to let up with them, that it quickly becomes impossible to care about anything that is happening onscreen. There's some decent imagery, and the lead remains someone you hope will survive the ordeal, but wondering if everything is real or none of it is real just leaves you shrugging as yet another scary moment occurs.

Holland does a good job in the lead role, and her ability is especially important while she carries the film for the majority of the runtime, but she's weighed down by a screenplay that gives her an all-too-familiar tragic backstory without enough full context and detail regarding her daily life as it is now. Sparks never feels like more than a creepy figure delivering exposition (funnily enough, he's a bit like a videogame guide), and there's not enough for the likes of Keena Ferguson Frasier, Emily Bennett, Mark Steger et al., to get their teeth into. 

There's enough to enjoy here if you're after something that feels entertainingly spooky. It's just a shame that it's also so hard to be invested in. I stopped caring about how the film would end as soon as things started to go bump in the mortuary. The more the main character was confused, yet also not reacting as strongly to the things happening around her as I would, the less I cared about where it was all going.  

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

Shudder Saturday: Bodycam (2025)

I have liked a number of movies from Brandon and Ryan Christensen (Brandon being the director, Ryan being a co-writer on a number of their past few features). Bodycam is easily their worst film yet, and it's almost insultingly bad in a number of ways. I'm annoyed with myself for being mildly impressed by the trailer that I watched last month. That didn't really misrepresent anything. I just allowed myself to think that it was a good concept that might be executed well. I was wrong on both counts.

What you have here is a tale of two cops. There's Officer Bryce (Sean Rogerson) and Officer Jackson (Jaime M. Callica). Their shift quickly goes from bad to worse when they're called to a domestic disturbance that leads to the accidental killing of a baby. Bryce is the one who could end up in major hot water, and he wants to figure out a way to change the narrative. That would mean figuring out a way to get rid of their bodycam footage though. Not only does that seem unlikely, the bodycams soon start showing more and more disturbing events as the two officers are manipulated and terrorised by numerous individuals who seem to be serving some malevolent deity.

I have mentioned it many times before, and will undoubtedly do so again, but there are certain warning signs to keep an eye out for when watching any "found footage" film. Bodycam doesn't manage to stay true to the nature of the format, which is actually one of the warning signs, but that would be the main descriptor for it. Many of the early scenes use torchlight, there are hardly any moments that don't have the action being obscured by the movement and unsteadiness of the camerawork, and the third act feels based around one or two main jump scares. I won't namecheck the far superior horror movie that this made me think of, but some imagery in the last scenes may have a lot of people thinking of the same one. (and thinking "I wish I'd watched *insert the title here* instead of this rubbish") 

It's hard to really rate the performances of Rogerson and Callica, who both do well enough at hitting their marks, but are hampered by the constantly painful hyperactivity of the pacing and the camerawork. Catherine Lough Haggquist, playing the mother of Callica's character, isn't as obscured, although her performance feels so weak that I wish it had been. Some others onscreen do quite well, despite the fact that they're simply moved around hither and thither in service of the central concept.

Are there some moments to give you chills? I guess so, but nothing that wouldn't work better packed into a short. This isn't an effective feature. It's a potentially enjoyable V/H/S segment, at best. The attempts to build atmosphere don't work, a lot of the first half feels like a waste of time as our two main characters go around in circles trying to cover up something that feels impossible to cover up, and the details littered throughout, meant to create a bigger picture of a dark world pushing at the membrane of our own, feel more tiresome than interesting. 

2/10

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

Shudder Saturday: The Last Horror Film (1982)

I've heard a wide range of opinions on The Last Horror Film, and now that I have finally seen it I can at least say that, well, it sure was something. Whether it's something good or bad is something I hope to settle on by the time I reach the end of this review.

Joe Spinell plays Vinny Durand, a New York taxi driver who dreams of one day making a great horror movie starring the wonderful Jana Bates (Caroline Munro). There's no need to go the traditional route though, obviously, so Vinny heads to the Cannes Film Festival, where he sets out to get rid of some competitors and put Jana in his movie, even if she doesn't want to do it.

I knew what I was in for here when we had gratuitous toplessness within the first thirty seconds. This was going to be a bit sleazy, it was going to be unconcerned with good taste, and it was going to deliver some very standard 1980s horror movie moments. Would it have any surprises for me? Sadly not, although there's a moderately enjoyable layering of self-awareness and meta commentary as it turns into something increasingly self-reflexive on the way to an ending that whimpers when it should be bellowing out a primal scream.

It's not up there with the best work from either of the leads (Spinell has been even sweatier and more disturbing in Maniac, whereas Munro has her Hammer and Bond highlights), but both are cast for what they obviously bring to their respective roles. That's more than can be said for the likes of Glenn Jacobson, David Winters, or Judd Hamilton (although Winters and Hamilton being in control behind the camera explains why they cast themselves in front of it).

Winters directs with a lack of any notable style, happy enough to fill out the runtime with snatched footage from Cannes in between a few disappointingly tame death scenes. There are some good lines scattered throughout the screenplay (co-written by Winters, Hamilton, and Tom Klassen), but nothing truly clever or memorable enough to make the most of the concept at the heart of the film. 

It may not be essential viewing, not even close, but there’s still enough here to make it one that horror movie fans should want to check off their watchlist. I am glad that I finally got around to it, but I doubt I will ever want to give it a rewatch.

5/10

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

Keeper (2025)

A nice weekend away. A cabin in the woods. A man (Malcolm, played by Rossif Sutherland) and a woman (Liz, played by Tatiana Maslany). It's a standard horror movie premise, but director Osgood Perkins and writer Nick Lepard try to deliver something a bit different. It's just a shame that they didn't try to deliver something really good.

Made cheaply and sneakily during a time when major strike action delayed the planned shooting schedule of The Monkey, this is a film that feels exactly like what it is. It's slight, it's unimpressive, and it was probably a lot more fun to make than to watch. 

When Malcolm and Liz arrive at their romantic destination, it doesn't take long for things to become slightly unsettling. There's something a bit off between the two of them, but neither seem to acknowledge it. Viewers might think they're watching two people play parts they don't really understand, which isn't something that should ever happen onscreen, unless it's very intentional. Everything gets even stranger when Darren (Birkett Turton) turns up, accompanied by his current partner, Minka (Eden Weiss). I've mentioned them here purely for the sake of the plot summary, but they're never more than occasional irritants.

It should be clear to anyone who has seen more than one Osgood Perkins movie by now that he has a very particular approach to the horror genre. There's often a focus on atmosphere over logic, but he's also become much more comfortable with mixing in some comedic elements. I can only assume that's what appealed to him about this idea, which would have been much more effective if allowed to be a much more straightforward horror. I'm not sure how much of this was fleshed out by Lepard (who did such great work on Dangerous Animals), but it feels like something that was workshopped and tweaked to cater to whatever the actors wanted to do on any given day.

Maslany is normally a great presence onscreen, and she has such fantastic range, but her performance here is not good. It's over the top and artificial in a way that calls attention to the weakness of the screenplay, and she's not helped by the others being equally bad. Sutherland, Turton, and Weiss benefit from me not expecting anything much from them, and they deliver . . . nothing much, to put it as nicely as I can.

People desperate for some folk horror may enjoy this, but only if you've avoided the many other folk horrors from the past few decades. It may not be awful in every department, but it's hard to remember that when so many individual moments stink so badly. Perkins has earned enough goodwill for me to keep looking forward to whatever he does next, but I'm not sure how long it will remain. 

3/10

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 

Shudder Saturday: The Draft! (2023)

I've seen some Indonesian horrors in my time, and more of them in the past decade as they have become more popular and accessible on a number of viewing platforms. They tend to be enjoyably spooky, and often also quite beautiful when it comes to the atmospheric visuals. The Draft! is a bit different. It's a meta movie, more of an offbeat comedy than a horror, but it makes use of many genre tropes in a way that will be very familiar to horror movie fans.

The basic plot revolves around five friends aiming to spend their weekend in an isolated property in the middle of some woods. Things soon start to turn odd and inexplicable, which leads the main characters to figure out that they're definitely in the middle of some kind of horror movie scenario. Can they use their knowledge to survive, or will they be unable to change a fate that is clearly pre-planned for them?

The big twist in The Draft!, revealed at about the half hour mark, is that . . . well, that would be saying. Suffice to say, the movie title itself should clue you in on it, and those who have read any plot summaries may already be aware, but I am going to try to avoid mentioning it, despite it making writing a review of the movie that much harder. It's very good though, even if it brings to mind a couple of interesting delights from years past (one being a Twilight Zone episode, one that feels almost like an inverse of this, and the other being the underseen, and wonderful, The End, written and directed by, and starring, Jeremy Thomas back in 2007). And it allows for the film to become crazier than expected, with seemingly unlimited options for where things could go. Sadly, it then doesn't really go anywhere, both literally and metaphorically.

The cast do well enough, although the main one to mention is Winner Wijaya, who plays the person most knowledgeable about film-making and horror movie "rules". The rest of the core group feel a bit more disposable, and are not helped by the fact that they're played like the end result of some bad writing and weak (or non-existent) character development, but they at least maintain a sense of fun and energy, even while going around in circles for a number of scenes after that big reveal.

It's almost as if director Yusron Fuadi, who also worked on the writing with Rochard James Halstead, B. W. Purba Negara, and Anindita Suryarasmi, decided to view the central idea as something that would let him off the hook in a variety of ways, instead of something that would exponentially reward more creativity and wit.

I am sure that more people will check this out, especially those intrigued once they hear the plot summary, and I am equally sure that many viewers will be disappointed by the squandered potential. I don't want to be THAT guy, but this could be a contender for something worth remaking, as long as whoever was helming the remake was willing to progress far beyond the relatively limited vision of Fuadi. 

6/10

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 

Shudder Saturday: A Chinese Ghost Story (1987)

Another week, another landmark title that I am finally getting to see decades after so many others. A Chinese Ghost Story is a mix of horror, comedy, romance, and martial arts. There's a feeling that it shouldn't really work, considering how quickly it jumps from one genre to another, but the leads and the visual style help a lot.

Leslie Cheung plays a timid debt collector who finds his life irrevocably changed when he takes shelter one night in a deserted temple. It's there that he meets a beautiful ghost (Joey Wong), although he doesn't initially realise her non-living status. The ghost is in trouble though, and needs help, which leads to our hero finding previously-untapped reserves of bravery, as well as him finding assistance in the form of a powerful priest (Wu Ma).

I kept getting the feeling that I'd already seen this, but that's only because it's a film that I have seen celebrated and mentioned in a few different documentaries. Not only has it appeared in conversations about a wide variety of horror movies, but I'm pretty sure I saw clips from this in some martial arts compilation hosted by Chuck Norris. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe it just falls in line with some other movies showcased there, but I certainly had a bit of déjà vu while this was on.

Leslie Cheung has a filmography littered with great performances (stopped abruptly by his untimely death after a lengthy battle with depression), and he's a delight in the lead role here, all nerves and good intentions. Wong is a delightful ghost, allowed to show a vulnerability and sweetness lacking in the other undead characters who populate this tale. Then you have Ma, entertainingly unflappable and powerful, and able to drag the story into even wilder territory. Lau Siu-ming is also very good, playing the big baddie of the film, a tree demoness with numerous spirits under her command.

It's a shame to think that the director of this, Ching Siu-tung, would one day have to helm a weak Steven Seagal film, but such is life. It's also a shame that I saw that over a decade before I saw this. At least I am not spending the near future making time for any more Seagal movies. I am, however, hoping to watch the next two films that were made after this one.

I encourage others to do the same, especially if you don't mind your horror leaning into the fantastical. Yuen Kai Chi does well to blend everything in a screenplay that maintains impressively high energy levels, yet also gives the love story time to bloom in between the fights and thrills. Recommended, but I wouldn't be surprised if everyone reading this had watched it long before me anyway. 

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 

Shudder Saturday: The Severed Sun (2025)

With the striking imagery of a woman raising an axe against a bright yellow background, The Severed Sun definitely had a poster that caught my attention when I saw it in thumbnail form. I hadn't heard anything about it though, and could only surmise that it seemed to be a slice of British folk horror. That was enough for me to decide on giving it some of my time.

Emma Appleton plays Magpie, a member of an isolated religious community. Magpie is the subject of much discussion when her abusive husband is violently assisted off this mortal coil. Her father, The Pastor (Toby Stephens), thinks he can still help to fix things, and help her by presenting a new husband (John, played by Barney Harris), but maybe another force is ready to guide anyone who believes in it strongly enough. 

Written and directed by Dean Puckett, making his narrative feature debut after years spent working on various shorts and documentaries, this is more interesting than it is successful, but there's a lot here to mark Puckett out as someone very capable and very worth keeping an eye on. He does well with the central idea, as well as allowing his cast to flesh out their characters in a way that I didn't expect when I noticed the relatively brief 80-minute runtime, but there just needed to be one or two other tweaks to tilt the whole thing into something truly unsettling and horrific. For as much as I enjoyed watching how this played out, I am not sure who else I would recommend it to.

Appleton, who I last saw in Lola, does well in the lead role. She gives a performance that establishes her character as bold and defiant enough to make those around her uncomfortable at the idea of how much she could upset the established order of things. It also helps that she spends a lot of the runtime battling against Stephens, doing a good line in sanctimony, and an insistent and unfriendly "neighbour", portrayed very effectively by Jodhi May. Harris does well enough, as do the likes of Lewis Gribben, Oliver Maltman, and James Swanton (the latter unrecognisable in a beastly role).

Puckett doesn't add anything truly exceptional to the general conversation about patriarchy and misogyny that has been more and more prominent throughout the last decade, but he handles the potentially difficult material well, and includes some moments of impressively striking imagery. While this isn't his first film, strictly speaking, it certainly feels like a good calling card for whatever might come next. And whatever might come next is something I will be interested in checking out.

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
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Shudder Saturday: Mother Of Flies (2025)

Another horror movie written by, directed by, and starring John Adams, Zelda Adams, and Toby Poser, Mother Of Flies is another interesting use of the genre to explore something a bit more thought-provoking and relevant than some of your more straightforward fright flicks. The Adams Family, as they are often affectionately known, excel in using their limited resources and budgets to present something that has a bounty of ideas to make up for the relative lack of polish. Let's not be unfair to them though, they're also bloody good when it comes to the technical side of things.

John and Zelda play Jake and Mickey, a father and daughter who are on a journey to visit a witch (Solveig, played by Poser). This is all to do with a medical diagnosis that Mickey has received, one that doesn't give her a very good chance of survival, and she decides that she may as well give something else a go, something other than science and medicine that may simply postpone the inevitable. 

While describing and discussing Mother Of Flies, there doesn't seem to be that much to it. My plot summary covers everything well enough, although we also get some backstory about Solveig and her place in the local area, and there aren't really any big shocks or surprises, despite some effectively unnerving imagery used here and there to show the ongoing cycle of life and death, as well as the battle between good health and various ailments. It feels more substantial when you're watching it though, and not just because it is based on the real experiences that the family have had with cancer throughout the past few decades. While horror can entertain, while it can make you tense and scared, while it can have you impressed by gore gags and fun kill scenes, it also provides a fantastic backdrop for many conversations that we should strive to make less discomforting for ourselves. Death is never far away in horror movies, of course, but it's good to take the more fantastical elements of the genre and juxtapose it alongside the everyday pains and horrors that so many endure in their lifetimes, either inside themselves or while helping loved ones.

I don't think anyone here is at the top of their acting game, certainly not in comparison to some big names who would never do this kind of thing nowadays anyway, but they have the bonus of being a family unit who can act around one another in a way that lacks any nerves or self-consciousness. Poser gets to have the best moments, which tends to happen when you play a witch known for your witchy ways, but all three leads to a decent job.

There's also another very good selection of music here, also from the family, and, overall, this is yet another worthwhile genre film that rewards those who have (like myself) decided to try and keep up with every feature that these talented creatives put out there. It's not quite up there with their very best, but it's absolutely one to make time for. You might even spend some time after the end credits have rolled considering what beliefs are generally supported by the masses and what aren't, and what difference that really makes to those who live their lives with enough personal faith to ignore whatever others say about them.

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
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share  

Prime Time: Death Of A Unicorn (2025)

Despite the general negative reviews I saw for Death Of A Unicorn, I held out hope that I would enjoy it. There's a decent idea at the heart of it (some people hit a unicorn with their car, and it's not long until some mono-horned revenge seems to be on the cards) and a great cast. In fact, my hopes would have been even higher for this if I'd known in advance that it not only included Paul Rudd, Jenna Ortega, Téa Leoni, and Richard E. Grant, but also Will Poulter, Sunita Mani, Anthony Carrigan, and Jessica Hynes.

Rudd and Ortega play Elliot and Ridley, a father and daughter heading to an important weekend event which could improve Elliot's earning potential. He has to schmooze his super-rich boss (Grant) and his family (his wife, played by Leoni, and son, played by Poulter). Things are complicated by the fact that Elliot hits and kills a unicorn on the drive there. Well . . . he THINKS he has killed it. There's no time to mourn for the beast though, nor appreciate the majesty of it, when the assembled rich folk realise that unicorns have magical healing properties.

The first full feature helmed by writer-director Alex Scharfman, this is full of amateur errors, although it must also be said that Scharfman does well with the visuals and his ensemble cast. He cannot nail down the tone though, starting things off with an emphasis on black comedy, trying to then deliver some scenes of tension and gore, and then swerving back to the comedy, but not without shoe-horning in some unearned emotional moments in the third act. The 107-minute runtime makes the whole thing feel a bit baggy, most of the dialogue lacks a required sharpness, and the very end scenes add to a feeling of the whole thing just being ever so slightly pointless.

Rudd is good, even if he is asked to dull his light slightly, while Ortega strives to make more of her part than just being "moody girl who sees the truth ahead of everyone else". Grant and Leoni are effortlessly enjoyable in roles that they could do in their sleep, and Poulter has the most fun of anyone onscreen, playing his part with a hilarious mix of selfishness, stupidity, and attempted menace. Hynes is an interesting choice for her character, and I must admit to being so delighted to see her in such an unexpected role that she didn't have to do any more than be present onscreen to keep me happy, and both Mani and Carrigan are used to highlight the huge chasm that exists between the haves and the have-nots (aka the employees).

This could have been so much more. Some decent creature design aside, it's a visually unappealing film, the main message running through it has been conveyed so much better in a number of better movies released in the past few years, and I would even say that the music by Giosuè Greco and Dan Romer is sadly lacking something. All of the ingredients are here, but only one or two can still be tasted by the time the lacklustre end result is served up.

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 

Netflix And Chill: Frankenstein (2025)

Everyone knows that writer-director Guillermo del Toro wanted to make Frankenstein for many years. It was already such a thematic through-line in so many of his movies (the perceived monsters overshadowed by actual monstrous humans) that maybe it was assumed that he'd managed to get it out of his system, but no. So it's good for us that people gave him over $100M to finally deliver his vision of the classic text. Maybe we will yet get his version of At The Mountains Of Madness.

Bookmarked by scenes set in the Arctic, this gives us Victor's Tale in the first half and then The Creature's Tale in the second, both announced by title cards. Young Victor may be played by Christian Convery, but things really get going when we meet the adult Victor (Oscar Isaac), a man consumed by the idea of conquering death, much to the dismay of many, including his own brother, William (Felix Kammerer). William and Victor aren't exactly close, but William is still excited to have his brother meet his fiancée, Lady Elizabeth Harlander (Mia Goth). This proves to be quite the fateful encounter, almost as fateful as Victor's encounter with Elizabeth's uncle, Henrich Harlander (Christoph Waltz), a wealthy man who wants to fund Victor's experiments. Then it's all body parts and lightning storms until you can cry out "it's alive, it's alive" and we get the creation of a creature (Jacob Elordi). Victor isn't actually prepared for his role as "new father" though, which makes things very difficult, to say the least.

With lovely cinematography from Dan Laustsen, a fine score from Alexandre Desplat, and great use of some well-dressed locations (it's always nice to see even a heavily-disguised Edinburgh onscreen), it's no surprise that Frankenstein is a feast for viewers. It may be a slightly overdone feast, considering the hefty 150-minute runtime and the moments that have a bit too much CGI in the mix, but it's a feast nonetheless. The biggest problem would seem to be that Del Toro is too close to the whole thing, and has been allowed to indulge himself with every decision, for better or worse. This is most obvious during the many times he seems to be pointing at a massive hand-painted sign that says "It's Victor who is the real monster, get it?", as if we haven't been reminding ourselves, and others, of this for many many years now.

Isaac is decent in the role of Victor, enjoyably single-minded and callous, and I am sure the film was helped to find some extra viewers by the moments that have him working feverishly on his creation without any care for the state of his clothing. Goth is a wonderful Elizabeth, and it was canny casting to also have her playing another pivotal role in the earlier scenes of the film. Elordi is the highlight though, giving an interpretation of the creature that shows the full range of his life, from the new-born confusion to his education, from his vulnerability to his rage. Helped by an interesting, if not altogether successful, make up job, Elordi feels as if he's giving his all to portray a definitive take on the creature that manages to feel both very traditional and quite modern. Waltz is used well, Kammerer less so, and there are good scenes for the likes of Lars Mikkelsen, David Bradley, and Charles Dance in supporting roles.

People seem to want to give us the "definitive" Frankenstein every few decades, but it hasn't really happened yet. This is certainly close though. Some scenes use too much digital trickery (let's not mention the imperfect wolves in one key sequence), and Del Toro has a strange way of turning the creature into something like a superhero at times (he's very Incredible Hulk throughout, which I'm sure we've all seen as a modern blend of Frankenstein/Jekyll & Hyde over the years anyway), but the overall feeling is one of care and quality. You know that you're in the hands of someone who really wants this to deliver on all of his promises, even if he unsubtly hammers home one or two of the key messages of the tale. Although, for all of Del Toro's good intentions, ending his own adaptation of Mary Shelley's touchstone text with a quote from Lord Byron is a major mis-step that may leave viewers slightly soured as the end credits roll.

This is very good. And there are some pleasantly surprising bursts of gore and real horror too. It's not great though, perhaps due to the fact that Del Toro put himself under pressure to cram in everything he'd ever envisioned for the project. He has, somewhat ironically, given birth to something that he explored and experimented on for many years. It's not a monstrosity, but I don't think it will ever be as beloved as some of his other "children". 

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
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Shudder Saturday: Pabrik Gula (2025)

However you review movies, whether in writing or on video, or even just in conversations with friends, you are never just reviewing movies. You are also reviewing context, whether just focusing on what is onscreen or exploring what is outwith the movie that informs it, from the perspective of both yourself and the movie. It is why I continue to hate the likes of Rotten Tomatoes, as well as other trends that encourage people toward the binary, as opposed to anything with nuance. 

This is all a lead up to telling you that I am very much aware that I may not be the best person to review Pabrik Gula, but I am going to give it a go nonetheless. While I have seen, and enjoyed, some other Indonesian horrors, the third act of this one felt particularly infused by a culture I am not very familiar with.

The starting point for the plot is simple. A group of people head off to work in a remote sugar factory for a while. They will stay on site, making some decent money for working hard. Hendra (Bukie B. Mansyur) and Wati (Wavi Zihan) hope the time will give them a strong foundation for their upcoming marriage. The others in the group want to make money while in the company of friends. It's not long until all of them are affected by supernatural happenings at the mill, with a presence there agitated by certain perceived transgressions by some of the workers.

Based (depressingly enough) on viral online tales by someone credited as SimpleMan, Sugar Mill has a screenplay from Lela Laila and direction from Awi Suryadi. I have seen at least one other Suryadi film (the disappointing Perewangan, also based on an online thread), but I am happy to say that this is much better than that outing. If you were also disappointed by Perewangan then I encourage you to still give this one a go. Suryadi does a much better job here of getting the basics right, delivering a number of fun scare moments that wouldn't seem out of place in some of the major mainstream horror movie hits of the past decade.

This is a film dripping with an impressive amount of atmosphere, almost every scene softened by low lighting and plentiful shadows, but with no detail lost (props to cinematographer Arfian for the gorgeous work here). It feels at times as if you're watching everything viewed through the eye-holes of a carved Halloween pumpkin, I don't know how else to quite describe it, and it's hugely satisfying to somehow feel both the warm glow of the bulbs and fires and the cold chill of the malevolence seeking to torment the main characters.

While I have nothing bad to say about Mansyur or Zihan, nor anything bad to say about Ersya Aurelia, Arbani Yasiz, Erika Carlina, Benedictus Siregar, Arif Alfiansyah, Yono Bakriem Azeka Putri, Budi Ros, and Dewi Pakis, I cannot say that I was interested in any one individual more than I was interested in seeing how the group dealt with everything that was happening. Different people have different roles (there are a few people here for comic relief, there are elders with a bit more wisdom, etc), but the characters essentially boil down to those who are living humans and those who are dark and demonic entities.

I enjoyed Pabrik Gula quite a bit, even if the third act felt a bit overlong, and a step down from the stronger middle section. I cannot tell how others will react to it though. Some may like it even more than I did, especially if they identify with the cultural attitudes and commentary underpinning the scares. Some may consider it a pale wannabe Wan-iverse imitator (a Wannabe, if you will). All I can do is recommend it, but with enough context for you to have some idea of what you're getting into.

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
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Shudder Saturday: The Jester 2 (2025)

Because I knew this was coming up on my viewing schedule this month, I made time a few days ago to check out The Jester. It was okay. I might have rated it higher if I was feeling charitable, but I also could have easily rated it lower if in a bad mood, so I think the absolute mid-point was a good rating for it. I'd heard that the sequel was a bit better though, along with comments about not really needing to see the first film anyway, so I was slightly optimistic when I pressed play on this.

That optimism was unwarranted. While I'm not sure if The Jester 2 is worse than the first film, it's certainly not a much better film. Writer-director Colin Krawchuk seems determined to keep this character mired in films that never make the most of his potential. It might help if there were other characters to keep things interesting. It might help to spend more time showcasing The Jester while he's being playful with his victims. I fear it's too late to see any positive changes though. Krawchuk has probably built up some kind of fanbase by now that will deter him from considering ways to improve his creation though. He'll probably be busy thinking up extra gore gags to get his killer jostling alongside Art The Clown in conversations about new slasher icons and memorable kills.

Kaitlyn Trentham plays Max, a young magician who ends up crossing path with The Jester (Michael Sheffield). The Jester needs to collect four souls after performing four tricks for people every Halloween. He loses his mojo, however, after having a trick interrupted by Max, and then ends up tying their fates together. Max has to perform tricks for The Jester, essentially picking a victim for the killer each time. Once she becomes aware of the full situation, Max tries to figure out how to break the cycle.

Sheffield doesn't do bad as the villain here, although he's hampered by having to wear a mask throughout. He's very good when he gets to overdo the gestures and physicality, but those better moments are few and far between. Trentham does well enough in her role to make you wish that she was in a better movie. Jessica Ambuehl plays her mother, not onscreen for long, and Dingani Beza is Willie, one of the few other characters onscreen to not immediately feel like "douchebag due a death scene". 

It clocks in at just under 90 minutes, but feels a bit longer, and there's little else worth praising outwith the two central performances. Krawchuk seems to have a talent for some individual moments, as well as some good atmosphere, but he's unable to string things together into a well-paced and satisfying feature. Which I doubt will stop us from getting a sequel to this. I guess the joke's on me.

5/10

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 

Granny Krampus (2024)

If you look through the respective filmographies of writer Christopher Jolley and director Jack E. Bell then you will see many choices that make it inevitable that they could work together on a film like Granny Krampus. And if you have seen any of the (many) other cheap Krampus movies we've had over the past couple of decades then you should know what this delivers.

Lea (Jodie Bennet) and Ashley (Poppy Castleton) are two sisterns who visit their gran (Hilary Burns) after the death of their mother. There's some tension in the air, considering how the family members have been estranged from one another for so long, and there's also a family secret due to be revealed. One that, given the title, you won't be surprised to find out involves a Krampus figure, known as Frau Percht. Charlie (Mark Rush) and Daniel (Tom Marchant) turn up in time to be endangered as things build towards a very "bah, humbug!" final act.

This isn't good. But many people who have already viewed many other Krampus movies will already know that. It's not actually terrible though, and certainly not as bad as I expected it to be. I don't want to spend too much time being impolite about the cast members, but most of the acting here is sub-par. That's one of the main aspects of the film that constantly reminds you of the low budget. Rush and Marchant benefit from being given some fun lines in the weak screenplay, but Bennet and Castleton have no such luck, and Burns is, there's no nicer way to say it, frankly awful.

Unlike other films that make use of the K-word in their title though, this actually gives a decent bit of screentime to the featured creature, and there's at least an attempt to make it look better than just someone in a cloak and cheap mask, even if it still may actually BE that, in essence. There are individual moments that are shot decently, considering Bell is trying to deliver some thrills while also hiding some of the many shortcomings just out of frame. It's not enough to make this worth recommending to those after some full-blooded holiday horror, but I appreciate that some effort has been made. It's more than can be said for many other movies in a similar vein.

As much as people may refuse to believe it, despite me saying it often enough, I always try to remain optimistic as I start watching any film. I even approach every independent Krampus-centric horror movie with the hope that it could be the one independent Krampus-centric horror movie gem that makes up for the sewage I have had washing over my eyeballs during past holiday seasons. This is not a gem, but it's also not a complete turd. And sometimes I feel that my optimism is rewarded if I've miraculously avoided another complete turd. 

I debated rating this lower because of the acting, but I decided to be relatively generous, considering the careless and lazy trash this could have been. 

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 

Santa Isn't Real (2023)

There has been a disappointing lack of killer Santa movies this year. The past few years have brough us  an abundance of the things, as well as other cinammon-spiced horrors. That's why I ended up checking out Santa Isn't Real, a film that begins with a young woman being attacked so viciously by Santa that she ends up in a coma for about a year.

It's hard to convince people that Santa exists. Nikki (Kaya Coleman) finds it almost impossible to convince her friends that Santa tried to kill her. Everyone believes it was a suicide attempt, but a Christmas get-together with friends should hopefully keep pushing her lowest point further into the past. Things are made a bit more awkward by the fact that Nikki's boyfriend, Nathan (Trey Anderson), has formed a strong connection with Jess (Scarlett Sperduto) while Nikki was in a coma. Meanwhile, Cissy Ly just hopes that everyone can get along and stay focused on keeping Nikki feeling loved and safe through Christmas. Santa has other ideas though.

The second feature film from writer-director Zac Locke, this is a surprisingly effective and interesting film that makes good use of standard slasher movie moments throughout and then throws an entertaining curveball in the third act that raises some great questions while also embracing an ambiguity about just who might be taking care of those deemed to have made it onto the naughty list. 

Coleman is decent in the lead role, not the best, but better than both Anderson and Sperduto. Ly is the best of the main cast members though, and I wish there was a way to keep her involved in more scenes. The film is notably better whenever she's onscreen, but the whole premise of the film revolves around Coleman's character ahead of anyone else. There may only be four leads, but Dana Millican gets to add another medical professional role to her CV and David Mitchum Brown pops up to play a Reverend for a couple of minutes. 

Sadly, while this worked for me, I can't imagine many others enjoying it as much as I did. I was happy to be patient, and happy enough with the infrequent flashes of gore (one bit of eye trauma is especially well done), but I was equally happy with the twisted and playful way the familiar material was presented. It's no absolute gem, but it is more ambitious and surprising than a hundred other features that could have been given this title. Others are unlikely to respond so positively to it, I assume, but I would love to hear from anyone else who was able to look past the obvious limitations to appreciate the substance of the whole thing.

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
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Shudder Saturday: The Occupant Of The Room (2025)

An adaptation of an Algernon Blackwood tale by writer-director Kier-La Janisse, presented in the annual short film presentations entitled "The Haunted Season", The Occupant Of The Room is a seasonally-tinged horror that, despite everyone involved, I reluctantly have to admit to really disliking.

Don McKellar plays a man, Minturn, who turns up at a remote hotel to find that his assumed reservation is not in place. And the hotel is fully booked. Well, there IS one room, but the occupant could return at any moment. A woman has gone trekking through the snowy surroundings, and it is assumed that tragedy has struck. If Minturn doesn't mind the circumstances, or the fact that the occupant could return (disturbing him, and requiring him to vacate the room at short notice), then maybe he could be accommodated.

I like what Janisse is aiming to do with "The Haunted Season", but it already looks as if she hasn't quite managed to stay in line with her own mission statement. Each episode/tale is supposed to be the kind of ghost story enjoyed at Christmas, a tradition that goes back many years. The most famous example of these would have to be A Ghost Story For Christmas, the fine BBC series that ran for a number of years, and has currently enjoyed a bit of a resurgence under the stewardship of Mark Gatiss. There are many others I would recommend, mainly in literary form, from classics written by the likes of Dickens and M. R. James to the wonderful, if slight, A Christmas Ghost Story, written by Kim Newman. I would even recommend the tale we had last year in this series, To Fire You Come At Last. Not this one though. It somehow lacks the required spooky atmosphere, focused instead on diving fully into the mindset of a main character who spends most of the time more confused than unnerved.

McKellar isn't bad in the main role, certainly trying hard to carry most of this short on his shoulders (as we spend most of the time with him alone in his room, of course). It's an internal performance though, given absolutely no help from his surroundings. Yes, there's a hotel room, and I understand not having money for outdoor shooting, but a few shots of snow-crusted windows and maybe some stock footage would have helped immensely. Ben Petrie and Delphine Roussel are okay in their small roles, despite both being required to act stilted and awkward in a way that also works against the potential spookiness. Janisse may have thought that this would help the atmosphere, but I would disagree. Although never physically onscreen, a voice performance from Maxine Peake is a welcome highlight. 

I really like the work that Janisse has done when it comes to her writing, her curating, and her documentary work. And I am sure that she is happy with how this has turned out. It just didn't work for me. I like my Christmas ghost stories to feel much spookier and chillier than this, although part of my problem with it may be down to the source material from Blackwood (who is far from my favourite of the celebrated writers in this genre).

3/10

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