Insidious: The Red Door (2023)

If watching Insidious: The Red Door has helped me fix a major blind spot then it was all worthwhile. I was setting up my review template for this (which is when I usually double-check cast and crew names) when I realised that I had been mis-spelling Leigh Whannell’s name for over a decade. Over a decade. Please, I implore you, if you ever read anything from me that contains such a constant error, please let me know. Sometimes the brain tricks you into thinking you are spelling things correctly, which can create the habit of a long-standing error. This long-standing error has now been corrected, with me editing every one of my online reviews that I could still access, after seeing Insidious: The Red Door. Which probably means that I got more from this film than most people.

I really enjoyed Insidious. While many people were underwhelmed by it, and quite a few were in a rush to refer to the main demonic figure as Darth Maul, I thought it was an excellent horror movie with some perfectly-executed scares. Despite the ups and downs of the series, it stays just ahead of The Conjuring movies, and is helped by not having to be beholden to central characters we know were actually viewed by many others as self-serving fraudsters. If Insidious: The Red Door is the last in the series then it is a very disappointing end, but I would prefer the series to end here than to try and limp through another instalment or two.

Everyone returns to their main roles, but the focus of the film is on the strained father and son relationship between Josh Lambert (Patrick Wilson) and Dalton Lambert (Ty Simpkins). Having had their most traumatic life experience wiped from their minds, there seems to be something else missing between them. Josh and Renai (Rose Byrne) have separated, and Dalton is leaving the nest aka heading to university. Go figure, something happens that triggers something in the mind of Dalton, leading him on a path to remember his past and face his demons. Literally. Helped on his journey by a new female friend (Chris Winslow, played by Sinclair Daniel), Dalton soon realises that he is in a lot of danger . . . and he might have to reconnect with his father to find a way back to something resembling a more normal, and much safer, life.

Written by Scott Teems, continuing song the path set out a long time ago by Leigh Whannell, Insidious: The Red Door is just about as redundant as movies get. There’s nothing new here, nothing to care about, and no  decent scares. As well as reprising his onscreen role, Wilson has been allowed to direct this, and it feels like a way to thank him for being part of two hugely successful modern horror movie franchises. That’s all well and good, but perhaps studios could just send him a wine subscription next time. Although competent, Wilson shows that he knows the basics of film-making without having noted the ways in which geography and set-ups are worked together to craft the best scares. The best moments here are, dare I say it, Wan-esque, but they are slightly mishandled in a way that makes you wish you were watching one of the earlier films in this series.

As for the acting, Wilson and Simpkins are both fine, and Byrne does what is required of her, but the only person to really stand out is Daniel, who provides a much-needed shot in the arm to the film, which would otherwise have been full of scenes showing one young man being glum, an older man being glum, and sometimes the two of them being glum together. 

Nobody is helped by the script, with Teems seeming far too nervous to stray from the central path that should lead to the end of the series, but the pacing and infrequent moments of humour help to make it more bearable than it could have been. Despite bringing to mind more memorable moments, callbacks to the first film generally work well, and there’s a middle section that allows Simpkins and Daniel to almost have some fun before everything descends further into darkness and peril.

It’s not good, but it’s not exactly awful either. I doubt I will remember it by next month though, and I certainly won’t want to ever revisit it.

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

The Whale (2022)

I tend to like the films of Darren Aronofsky, even if just for the visuals, and The Whale is a film I was happy to see provide a resurgence for Brendan Fraser, an actor that I (as well as many other people) have always had a soft spot for. A lot of people were quick to praise it, quick to praise Fraser, and it seemed like I was going to find plenty to enjoy here, putting aside the ongoing debate about actors wearing “fat suits”.

I didn’t enjoy The Whale. It has a couple of big problems, and the fat suit is the least of them (although I should note here that I view those items as I view any other make up or wardrobe choices made to help turn any actor into a character, personally). 

Written for the screen by Samuel D. Hunter, adapting his own stage play, the biggest problem is the script. This tale, of a morbidly obese man (Charlie, played by Fraser) looking to reconnect with his daughter (Ellie, played by Sadie Sink) as he searches for something honest and real before his heart gives out, just resonates throughout with an inauthenticity that would make the central character belt out a primal scream. It also has a message at the centre of it that feels like it could have been written by any disenchanted teenager. 

Aronofsky feels redundant in his role, failing to bring much to the table to stop this from feeling like the filmed stage play it is. We rarely leave the confines of Charlie’s home, and there are too few flourishes to make it feel worth actually being presented as a film. Just set up one or two cameras and present a raw, “live”, version of the play. That might have been better. It might have even rendered the use of the fat suit unnecessary.

Fraser is good, and I am happy for the praise he has been getting, but his performance is supported by the make up. Ty Simpkins does well in a few scenes, playing a stranger who enters Charlie’s life at quite a strange time, and Samantha Morton delivers her usual greatness with her all-too-brief screentime (playing Charlie’s ex-partner, and the mother of Ellie). But the best performances come from Sink, a mix of resentment, sass, and intelligence, and Hong Chau, playing Liz, a woman who is trying to help Charlie, despite him not really caring about his own quality of life. Sink and Chau are the highlights of the whole film, and I wish their performances were a larger part of the conversation during this award season, but nobody does bad work, despite working with a pretty bad script.

I know that Aronofsky isn’t exactly known for his subtlety. He is a director who works best when delivering a powerful message through a selection of powerful visuals. I can see why The Whale appealed to him, but I think he made the wrong choice. This needed either more fantastical imagery to distract from the irritating simplicity of the writing or it needed a director willing to strip it down to the bare bones of a naked performance piece.

A film that is saved, if not elevated, by the main performances, The Whale misses so many opportunities to say something really worthwhile. The people involved ensures that many will see it, and many will love it. I would be very surprised if it is well-remembered more than a decade from now.

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

Insidious: Chapter 2 (2013)

After an interesting, and spooky, prologue, Insidious: Chapter 2 gets straight down to business by continuing on from the events at the end of the first movie. Josh (Patrick Wilson) and Renai Lambert (Rose Byrne) have their son back, after rescuing him from supernatural entities, and everyone hopes that things will get back to normal. But that's just not going to happen. There's a murder to be investigated, and there are also some strange things still happening to the family. Renai is at the end of her rope, Josh doesn't want to believe that anything else will try to harm them, and granny Lambert (Lorraine, played by Barbara Hershey) eventually pieces enough together to re-enlist the paranormal investigators, Specs (Leigh Whannell) and Tucker (Angus Sampson).

James Wan returns to direct, and Whannell once again multi-tasks as he acts onscreen after completing his duty as the writer of the screenplay. The two work well together, creating horrors that mix atmospheric moments with jump scares and unnerving imagery. Still, if you didn't like the first movie then you're not going to like this sequel. It's more of the same, and even reworks a few scenes in a nice wrinkle added to the standard paranormal activity.

The cast do what's asked of them, but the acting on display here isn't really the best that you'll see. Mind you, it's pretty good stuff compared to what viewers CAN be made to endure within the horror genre. Wilson has some fun, Byrne does well while not being allowed to relax for a minute (spending the entire movie with frayed nerves, bless her), and Hershey is good enough to help make the weaker moments work. Whannell and Sampson will annoy everyone who was annoyed by them the first time around, but I enjoyed the comic relief that they provided. Lin Shaye gets to return, playing Elise Rainier, albeit a changed version of her. Although she's not onscreen for that long, her character is shown to be, arguably, the most important one caught up in the whole situation. Steve Coulter is a new addition to the team, playing another paranormal investigator named Carl, and he does well with his role, particularly in a tense scene that sees him challenged over his method of divining results.

Perhaps not quite good, or intense, enough for more experienced horror fans, the Insidious movies definitely contain enough thrills and chills to scare plenty of money out of mainstream audiences. While I can see flaws in both movies, I must admit that I'm happier to see a film like this succeed than yet another remake of some '80s movie that someone erroneously thinks needs a big dollop of CGI to improve it. There are some big plot points here that will either please or turn off viewers, but you have to give the film-makers some credit for trying to twist the material into something a bit more interesting and unique. Okay, you don't HAVE to give them credit. But I do.

7/10

http://www.amazon.com/Insidious-2-Blu-ray/dp/B00FG5L2OC/ref=tmm_blu_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1405227344&sr=8-2