Noir-vember: The Big Knife (1955)

If you work through the filmography of director Robert Aldrich then you'll see a number of movies that I think could be described best as tough. Whether that is in the overloaded machismo of the central cast or in the way they unflinchingly tackle the main subject, Aldrich proved time and again that he was a film-maker happy to make tough movies. The Big Knife is just as tough as anything else he helmed, particularly when you consider how more vitriolic and spiky it would have seemed when first released.

Jack Palance gives one of his best performances as Charlie Castle, a movie star trying to balance his onscreen success with some personal problems. He's not in a good place with his wife, Marion (Ida Lupino), but he would always choose her happiness over any new contract to be signed with Stanley Hoff (Rod Steiger). That's no good for Hoff though, especially when he has dirt on Castle regarding a past accident that someone else got the blame for. Hoff, and his "fixer" (Smiley, played by Wendell Corey), keep applying the pressure, which affects Castle, and also those who are in his immediate vicinity.

Based on a play by Clifford Odets, The Big Knife benefits from a sharp screenplay from James Poe, as well as impressively fearless performances from all of the main cast members. This is a scabrous attack on the Hollywood studio system, and it's far too easy to identify with it all today, considering what we know about production companies and networks bending over backwards to hide misbehaviour, crimes, and abuses committed by their star clients. 

Aldrich typically takes no prisoners with his approach to the material, especially in the way that he offers no softening of the characters played by Steiger and Corey. Those are bad people engaged in many bad things, and they walk through a lot of the movie without a care for anything other than contracts and studio business. There's also no complete forgiveness for the character played by Palance, who is presented from the very beginning as someone struggling to maintain his character under the weight of regrets, guilt, and the constant gaze of others. Poe sketches every scar and bruise, but Aldrich gives his cast room to turn around and put them all on full display.

And it has to be said that everyone relishes the challenge here. Palance is incredible, and the effectiveness of his performance is underlined by how much we can actually care about him by the time the last scenes start to play out. Steiger and Corey are excellent villains, and it doesn't matter that they're not given that much depth. People who stay so focused on power and money often don't have that much depth, with everything else they do just a means to an end as they keep their eye on their transactions and standing at all times. Lupino gives a winning turn that feels close to how strong-willed and awesome she must have been in her real life (because if you know even some of what Lupino achieved throughout her career then you must have some idea of how brilliant she must have been), and both Jean Hagen and Shelley Winters are allowed to captivate viewers in different ways for the scenes that focus on them. Wesley Addy and Everett Sloane also do well in their roles, both offering some genuine care and advice to Palance's character.

There are other films you may check out ahead of this, great films that have endured throughout the decades since they were made, but The Big Knife deserves to be listed alongside them. I don't think this is quite as good as some of those, but I also don't think it should be as forgotten or overlooked as it seems to be nowadays. It's as sharp as it ever was. 

9/10

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. All links are HERE.
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

Prime Time: Pitfall (1948)

While it may not be the grittiest, nor most memorable, film noir, Pitfall is a film that you won't forget too quickly, especially after you spend some of the last few minutes of the movie feeling as if you've been directly spoken to by a character who goes on about trusting the police to resolve matters that have gotten out of hand due to some extra-marital activities.

John Forbes (played by Dick Powell) is the married insurance adjuster who finds his world collapsing around him when he takes a bit of a shine to pretty Mona Stevens (Lizabeth Scott). Forbes isn't the only one to be smitten though. There's also the big and gruff MacDonald (Raymond Burr). Forbes is asking for trouble, especially when he already has himself what seems to be a happy and stable marriage to Sue (Jane Wyatt).

With a screenplay credited to Karl Kamb and direction from the very capable André De Toth, Pitfall is an amusing diversion that somehow doesn't feel overlong, despite clocking in at 86 minutes (which seems like far more time than the premise requires). There are some crimes that occur, but the main object of the film seems to be a couple of important moral lessons. One, don't even think about having an affair. Two, always call the police at the first sign of things creeping into dangerous territory.

Powell is quite the dependable everyday Joe he needs to be in the main role. He's certainly not someone to be viewed as particularly good, but he's far from the scheming and manipulative characters seen in so many harder noirs. The same could be said for Scott, who is an object of desire without spending every minute of her screentime trying to wind everyone around her little finger. The only one who really feels as if he could have been placed in any other noir film of the period is Barry, who is suitably mean and menacing, and does what he can to cause the problems that come to a head in time for the final scenes. Bryon Barr is also a menace, especially when jealous of the attention that "his woman" is receiving from another man, but he's only present for a few minutes of screentime. Wyatt is a very level-headed and loving wife, Jimmy Hunt is a child actor who manages not to be too irritating, a talent that helped him maintain a run of decent supporting roles that kept him employed between the late 1940s to the early 1950s (hey, not the longest run for the peak years of his career, but one of those films he starred in was the classic Invaders From Mars).

De Toth may not do anything to lift up the material, but he's happy enough to rely on the characters and the acting to keep viewers hooked, and that's absolutely fine. This zips along nicely. It would have been nice to have some more danger throughout the runtime, but there's enough at stake to make everything uncomfortable for Forbes before the end credits roll. The only mis-step is the aforementioned lecture delivered near the closing moments of the film, but it's something you just have to accept in some of these films that explored subject matter frowned upon by censors and those determined to rail against the moral decline of "modern society". 

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. All links are HERE.
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

Noir-vember: Verity (2026)

Another film based on a book by Colleen Hoover, Verity is glossy trash. That is only a problem if you really dislike glossy trash though, and the only thing that really matters is whether or not this is good glossy trash.

Dakota Johnson plays Lowen Ashleigh, a young writer who is struggling to find any major success. That looks set to change when she is plucked from relative obscurity to be a ghost writer on behalf of Verity Crawford (Anne Hathaway). Verity is a best-selling writer, known for her ability to write great villainy. She's also paralysed and unable to speak after a recent car crash, but her publishers are trying to keep that on the down low. Not only is Lowen in a very strange situation, she's there with Verity's handsome husband, Jeremy (Josh Hartnett), and a journal full of dark secrets that nobody else is aware of.

It's strange to think that director Michael Showalter has such a lot of comedy in his earlier works because what is really lacking here is fun. Nick Antosca's screenplay is disappointingly tame (aside from a core idea that feels like an updated riff on a memorable moment in Leave Her To Heaven), the 117-minute runtime takes too long to take viewers to an end point that is hugely unsatisfying, and none of the central cast members get to let their hair down in ways that the premise should allow.

Hathaway comes closest to actually enjoying herself, but even she ends up far too restrained when you think about what is being presented to viewers. This should have been an easy home run for her. She ends up striking out instead. At least there's the odd attempt to lean into the silliness from Johnson, who I am starting to like more and more for her enjoyably varied movie choices, and for boldly uttering the lines: "That's just my face. I have resting bored face. I get that a lot". She cannot lift up the whole movie alone though, and she's not helped at all by a fairly somnambulistic Hartnett. Brady Wagner gives the kind of child performance that forces me to avoid commenting on it, for fear of accidentally hurting the feelings of someone so young, Irina Dvorovenko is completely wasted, and nobody else makes much of an impression.

There's a small amount of gratuitous nudity, and an oh-so-fleeting moment of unbridled passion, but those are played out in a surprisingly tame and prudish way, as if Showalter and Antosca want to pay lip service to the kind of film this could be without fully committing to it. Although I am unfamiliar with the source material, it becomes clear as the film plays out that there was room here to play around more with the characters and some thriller movie tropes. I was reminded of a film I saw years ago at a festival, Red Velvet, but that film had the freedom and creativity to have fun with different perspectives. This does not.

I really wanted to like this. And the first two thirds of the movie came close to the kind of entertaining silliness I assumed it would be. It all comes crashing down in that third act though, culminating in a finale so preposterous and unsatisfying, yet also smugly raising an eyebrow to viewers as it all ends with some attempt at interesting ambiguity, that it should leave most people feeling as if they have just wasted two hours. Verity isn't worth trying to get invested in, and that's the sad truth.

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. All links are HERE.
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

Mubi Monday: Barking Dogs Never Bite (2000)

Dog lovers may want to avoid this one, although it's important to note that those who made the film assure everyone that no animals were harmed in the making of it. Directed by Bong Joon-ho, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Song Ji-ho and Derek Son Tae-woong, this is a film that will appeal to anyone who has found themselves driven to a state of temporary insanity by an incessantly barking dog in the neighbourhood. And doesn't every neighbourhood have at least one incessantly barking dog?

Ko Yun-ju (Lee Sung-jae) is a young man struggling to find the right job. He wants to become an academic professor, but the best way to get that kind of job seems to involve bribe his way through any interview process. That would take money that he doesn't really have, especially with his partner (Eun-sil, played by Kim Ho-jung) being pregnant with their first child. Meanwhile, Park Hyun-nam (Bae Doona) dreams of becoming famous one day, perhaps by foiling some robbery or crime. There's also a barking dog, as well as a dog that is unable to bark. I hope those two don't get mixed up in a way that seriously impacts the main characters.

The feature directorial debut from Joon-ho, who would ensure that his sophomore feature would overshadow so many of his other films (that is Memories Of Murder, and you NEED to see it), Barking Dogs Never Bite is a dark and odd film, but not without moments of comedy. As long as you can accept that the onscreen dogs are in grave danger. It also has the kind of social commentary that can be found in so many of his films, although it's easy to overlook any of that as the characters are moved into the spaces needed to bring situations clashing against one another.

Sung-jae is very good as the nominal lead, and Ho-jung works well alongside him, but everyone is overshadowed by the brilliant Doona, who portrays her characters with a winning blend of optimism, good intentions, and just a bit of mopiness. Go Soo-hee also does good work, playing a friend of the character played by Doona, and Kim Jin-goo makes a strong impression, not just due to the fact that she is the owner of the barking dog. 

Although a smaller scale than other films from Joon-ho, this is made with no less care or skill. It's plotted well, tying everything together in a way that will be familiar to fans of crime thrillers that make great use of some unhappy coincidences (the word "Coen-esque" could be applied here), and the performances help to keep the tone surprisingly light even as a number of sequences move around some dark and disturbing content.

Impressive and engrossing, and, in a way that plays out like an inversion of the title, it manages to be quietly effective as it sinks its teeth into you.

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. All links are HERE.
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: Mystic River (2003)

It's hard for me to believe now just how much I used to like Mystic River. I loved it. I thought the acting was superb, one or two quibbles aside, and appreciated it as a powerful piece of dramatic work. Now? Don't get me wrong, it's not a film I will ever dismiss as being awful, but the power of it has greatly diminished in the past couple of decades since it was first released. And at least one performance feels like an actor acting his actorliest to ensure all viewers are aware of, and recognise, his ACTING.

The story starts in the past, with with three young boys playing on a sidewalk. They're caught by a man while writing their names in cement, with one of the boys hauled off to be reprimanded. Apparently. It soon becomes clear that this boy has been captured by predators, and is seriously traumatised when he is eventually found days later.  In the present those three boys have grown up to be a gangster (Jimmy Markum, played by Sean Penn), a cop (Sean Devine, played by Kevin Bacon), and a man still haunted by that day he was taken into that car (Dave Boyle, played by Tim Robbins). The men are reunited by the murder of Jimmy's teen daughter (played by Emmy Rossum), an inciting incident that forces them all to look back over their past lives and to consider their different paths.

Based on the novel by Dennis Lehane, there's a decent screenplay here by Brian Helgeland, particularly when it comes to exploring the personality of Dave, a man who still can't quite process what he was put through as a young boy. There's also a definite "sins of the father" message playing out, and that works well as the various strands tie together in the third act. It's just a shame that the cast isn't as strong as it could be, and it's a shame that director Clint Eastwood didn't consider trimming the 138-minute runtime to omit a coda that I've always viewed as very strange and out of sync with the rest of the film.

A lot of praise went to Penn for his performance, but I'd argue that he's the weakest of the leads. Whether grimacing in pain and anger or trying to give his best bit of DeNiro-esque quiet menace, Penn's performance is based completely on getting people to watch him perform. It's a big mis-step, and almost unbalances the whole film. Bacon does a bit better, helped by the fact that he is given more of a variety of emotions to work with, and also ably supported in many scenes by an ever-dependable Laurence Fishburne. It's Robbins who deserves the real credit though. Having somehow managed to fit his 6'5" frame into a wide variety of characters throughout his film career, this may be his best work yet when it comes to making himself seem small and vulnerable. He's not entirely comfortable with the accent that his character has, but he's always convincing as a man seeing the world through some thin funereal shroud that has been wrapped around him since his childhood. Marcia Gay Harden and Laura Linney are a bit wasted, although the former has a couple of good moments in the first half of the film, and Tom Guiry, Spencer Treat Clark, and Andrew Mackin do well as three young men who become persons of interest in the ongoing investigation.

Maybe this will be remade in a couple of decades, and maybe the cast will work better. Eastwood was clearly drawn to the material, and there's an undeniable power to a couple of key sequences, but I think he allowed himself to be hoodwinked by someone who wasn't really right for one of the key roles. In fact, ironically enough, Penn may have been a better choice to step behind the camera on this one. 

I would never call this a complete washout, but some of the sins needing cleaned in Mystic River aren't just ones belonging to the characters onscreen. Some of them belong to the performances, and the decisions guiding those performances. The good still outweighs the bad though, and I still recommend this to people who have never seen it before. 

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. All links are HERE.
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 Cycle (2026)

The great thing about The Cycle is that it's a film full of unexpected treats. The worst thing about trying to review The Cycle is that it's a film full of unexpected treats. You may have already seen many people saying "go into it as blind as possible". That is absolutely correct for those wanting the best viewing experience. Seriously, don't even read this review. Watch the movie first, and then come back here. I always try to stay as spoiler-free as possible, and will aim for that here, but that makes me feel as if I am unable to truly "sell" The Cycle to those who may be undecided on it. Trust me, if you're a fan of dark thrillers and horror movies then you really want to check out something that feels impressively original and crafted with a whole lot of TLC.

Director Jordan Downey made a bit of an impact with his silly debut, ThanksKilling, and the even sillier sequel to that movie, Thankskilling 3, but this continues his progress in the more serious direction he has taken throughout the last decade. He's still working with Kevin Stewart, a long-time collaborator, and both men must be able to look back and see a giant chasm between the present and the killer turkey past.

Deborah Ann Woll plays Meg, a forensic anthropologist asked to help the police in a very mysterious murder case. Three people are dead, but one of those people appears to be her father (David Myers Gregory), a man who went missing many years ago. Stranger still, his corpse appears in remarkably good shape, considering he took his own life about a month before the murders, according to the forensic evidence anyway. Things get even stranger when the corpse refuses to remain in one place, and Meg ends up getting more involved with an investigation that might just end up explaining some childhood memories she never really understood.

That's all I will say about the plot of The Cycle, and it's more than enough to help you decide whether or not you should watch it. But you should definitely watch it. The first half of the film is very much in line with a hundred other crime thrillers, albeit with the mystery of the corpse movement hinting at something stranger, and possibly supernatural. Then a real highlight of a scene plays out just over the halfway point that takes things in an entirely unexpected direction, transforming the film from an average thriller to an excellent horror.

Woll is a great lead. She's been involved in many horror (or horror-adjacent) projects throughout her career, and feels very comfortable performing with material that delivers fantastical elements while staying nicely grounded. Jeffrey Donovan is her main co-star, playing a bemused and determined cop, and he also does good work. Flashbacks allow Gregory to deliver a solid supporting performance, Jeb Berrier is a highlight, playing a coroner named Joe, and there are pivotal characters portrayed superbly by Gretchen Corbett and Phillip Andre Botello (Meg's mother and a prime suspect, respectively).

There's so much more that I want to mention, from how well-constructed the screenplay is to the genuinely impressive practical FX work that stands up as the best I have seen in this particular field for a very very long time, but the more I mention the more I risk spoiling something. And, to reiterate what so many others have said, "go into it as blind as possible" for the best experience. You won't regret it.

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. All links are HERE.
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

Noir-vember: Black Gravel (1961)

A fascinating noir from Germany, and one based in the very real situation that many found themselves after the impact of WWII, Black Gravel looks at people who are struggling to make ends meet, struggling to contain their resentments, and generally looking for ways to improve their lives. Some attach themselves to someone with prospects, trying to forget their past life. Some enter prostitution. Many look to make money from a lucrative black market system.

Robert Neidhardt (Helmut Wildt) is one of the latter, a truck driver who works with others to divert black gravel. It's going quite well, but there's soon a full investigation into the situation. There's also a reunion between Robert and an ex-girlfriend, Inge (Ingmar Zeisberg), although she is now married to an American military man (Hans Cossy), coming into the area because of the expansion of the American Air Force base that is boosting the local economy. Sparks fly, and everything is further complicated by the accidental death of a young couple on the road, leaving two corpses to be buried beneath some of that black gravel.

The first feature I have seen from director Helmut Käutner, who was quite the prolific film-maker throughout the 1950s and 1960s, this will hopefully not be my last. It's fantastic stuff, taking time to develop some fascinating central characters, as well as presenting the context of their lives. The screenplay, co-written by Käutner and Walter Ulbrich, moves along quickly enough, but also gives time for viewers to catch up with everything as new information is presented and the main situation starts to see-saw between good and bad consequences. The 113-minute runtime is perfect, even if the very end feels a bit more sudden than expected.

Wildt is very believable as the determined and occasionally-pretending-to-be-noble Neidhardt. He doesn't necessarily have bad intentions, aside from his black market profiteering, but he's also selfish and blinkered when it comes to possible ways out of a very bad situation. Zeisberg plays her part nicely in line with her co-star, easily showing why the two may be destined to stay connected to one another. Anita Höfer may have a much smaller role, but she steals a couple of scenes and ensures that you'll remember her long after the film has finished. And then there's Cossy, doing good work with what is arguably the most difficult of the main roles. Cossy also doesn't seem bad, per se, but it turns out that he's motivated in ways that are quite similar to our struggling truck driver. It's just that he has a different way of working his way up out of the metaphorical quicksand holding so many others down.

These are interesting characters in a unique situation, and Black Gravel holds up as one of the most atypical noirs I have watched in a very long time. I would have been drawn into this if it had just been showing me the lives of people in this strange situation. But the addition of some death and deceit takes it to another level.

It's also worth mentioning, just before I end this review, that Black Gravel also has some notoriety attached to it, considering a charge of antisemitism levelled against it that saw a couple of moments excised from the film for almost half a century. That footage has now been restored, and I implore everyone watching the film to ensure that they take note of the pre-feature notes contextualising this material.

9/10

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. All links are HERE.
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

Noir-vember: The Dark Past (1948)

While it's a decent enough noir, and a pacy thriller, The Dark Past is also fun to watch because of it being a bit of a time capsule. It's one of those films that is based around one or two main ideas that feel relatively new to audiences, leading to some conversations in which concepts are discussed in ways that educate everyone on exactly what is being presented to them. Sometimes that can be mental health issues, sometimes it's to do with sexuality (as it could be discussed while dancing around the moral guardians of society anyway), but this time around it's all about the positive impact of psychoanalysis.

A couple of scenes showing Dr. Andrew Collins (Lee J. Cobb) talking to a police detective bookend the film, which ensures audiences know that things are going to turn out okay when the majority of the runtime plays out an extended flashback. Collins, along with his family and friends, are spending time at their vacation cabin, but this vacation is rudely interrupted by an escaped prisoner, Al Walker (William Holden), and his small gang of cohorts. Needing to wait it out until they can head on to a pickup point, Walker and co. are agitated and very dangerous. But maybe also receptive to some exploration of a recurring nightmare that has plagued Walker for years.

A number of writers worked on getting this to the screen, adapting a play, "Blind Alley", written by James Warwick. Director Rudolph Maté (someone else who may not be very familiar to most, but certainly has some titles worth checking out, including the next one he would helm after this, D.O.A.) knows what has to be done, and he does it well. The emphasis remains on dialogue and rehabilitation throughout, with Collins convinced that recognising and treating past trauma can do much more than simply judging all criminals as lost causes to be locked up and forgotten about. The willingness of Walker to go along with some form of treatment may be a bit unbelievable, but it's not enough to spoil the film, especially considering his co-operation is necessary for the second half to play out as it does.

Cobb is the solid pillar of the community, and he constantly tries to handle the criminal gate-crashers with care and caution, while also looking to make some progress toward a resolution for everyone. Holden is as erratic as expected, in the earlier scenes anyway, but also shows a tiredness that allows him to be more receptive to someone offering to help him with one particular problem. The supporting cast includes Nina Foch, Ruth Collins, Steven Geray, and a few others, but they all fade into the background whenever Cobb and Holden are shown to be putting some trust in one another.

It's short, clocking in at about 73 minutes, it's entertaining, and it's sometimes a filmed version of "psychoanalysis for dummies", which means that most people should have some fun with it. It's just a shame that all of the grit and danger is contained within the first 15-20 minutes, leaving you with something that is much more cosy and comfortable than many other noirs of the time.

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. All links are HERE.
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

Prime Time: Heart Of Midnight (1988)

When you see the poster design for Heart Of Midnight, and when you read the plot summary, it seems indistinguishable from so many other erotic thrillers of the '80s and '90s. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. It's just a shame that nobody involved could do good work on it.

Jennifer Jason Leigh stars as Carol, a troubled young woman who hopes to start a fresh chapter in her life when she inherits a nightclub from her deceased uncle. Unfortunately, things don't get off to a great start, leading to Carol encountering someone (Peter Coyote) she isn't sure about trusting. The club has a number of secrets within it, as does Carol.

Written and directed by Matthew Chapman, who seems to have spent the first half of his film career trying to make an impact in the erotic thriller market, Heart Of Midnight is a poor and muddled film saved by the presence of Leigh in the lead role. The end of the film clarifies exactly what it is aiming to explore, but none of it works as well as it should. It's almost too slick and flippant throughout, when the whole thing needed to be grittier and even more focused on showing the mental state of the central character. 

While Leigh is good in her role, she's largely alone. Coyote is looking his very best off-brand-Kevin Costner, but doesn't have the right amount of charm or heat for his role. Neither James Rebhorn or Steve Buscemi get enough screentime, Frank Stallone gets a bit too much screentime (playing a very standard movie cop), and Denise Dumont tries hard with a role that needed to be much more integral to the plot. Gale Mayron is the only other cast member worth mentioning, but she crumples under the weight of what she has to carry through the third act of the film.

There were ways to handle this material, considering the seriousness of the central subject matter and the deceptive erotic thriller sheen (and, please note, although I have used that label a few times in this review, Heart Of Midnight is no such thing), but this isn't it. This was something that needed a writer and director who could expertly thread the needle, which Chapman cannot do. I understand using certain elements to sell the film one way, hoping to effectively Trojan Horse something quite different in front of audiences, but Chapman spends too much time making things feel dark and mysterious in a way that supposedly seems alluring when there should have been a constant underpinning of pain and danger throughout.

Remake this with some added horror elements and you could have a decent little Hellraiser movie. Remake it with a focus on someone having the time to explore themselves and a reworked ending and you could have something much more entertaining. Remake it with the squalor and awfulness it really needs and you could have a difficult watch that rewards those who endure it. Basically . . . I recommend people try to remake this more than I recommend people watch it.

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. All links are HERE.
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

Noir-vember: A Woman's Vengeance (1948)

Written by Aldous Huxley, A Woman's Vengeance is one of many little noir movies that you can watch and enjoy, and then pretty much guarantee that you'll forget about for the rest of your life. It's slight fun, although the 96-minute runtime still somehow includes a resolution that feels surprisingly silly and rushed.

Charles Boyer is the charming Henry Maurier, husband to the sickly Emily (Rachel Kempson). When he's not being absolutely lovely and friendly to Janet Spence (Jessica Tandy), Henry enjoys spending his time with the young and beautiful Doris Mead (Ann Blyth), which obviously gets him viewed with a raised eyebrow or two, at the very least. It also puts him very much in the frame when his wife suddenly dies. Henry is a bit of a cad, perhaps, but is he a murderer?

Making use of a very good, and relatively small, central cast, A Woman's Vengeance is one of a handful of features directed by Zoltan Korda, someone with a short, but seemingly solid, filmography. He directed about twenty films in all, but those included The Four Feathers (1939) and one of the first live-action films to be based on The Jungle Book (1942). He may not be one of the big names in the history of cinema, but he's certainly worth remembering. He does well here, keeping things surprisingly light and jovial on the way to a third act that then starts to tighten the noose around the neck of our main character.

Boyer is a delight in his role, so unrelentingly smooth that you can see why he gains such a strong connection with a number of women in his life. Tandy has to be more stiff and uptight, which she does well, but the best moments show how she is affected whenever she ends up given attention by a man she clearly adores. Blyth is perfect in her role, young and wide-eyed without being too crude or childish, and Kempson does well with her small amount of screentime. Others onscreen include Cedrick Hardwicke and Mildred Matwick (both superb as very different medical professionals), Cecil Humphreys, and Hugh French.

Huxley is probably the biggest asset here though, adapting his own short story, "The Gioconda Smile", into something that delivers a good amount of melodrama and exploration of the human psyche. This may be a bit light on the twists and betrayals that populate so many other, better, film noirs, but the first two acts are like watching a house of cards being built up that you know will be made to fall in the final scenes. It's just a real shame that those final scenes don't work as well as they should, making use of a couple of very obvious tricks that I'm surprised would have impressed viewers even back in 1948. Still, I had a good enough time with the rest of the film. I'll just pretend that it had a better ending.

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. All links are HERE.
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

Mubi Monday: Following (1998)

While Following may not be the greatest feature directorial debut ever, it's one that is interesting to watch now, to see how the man behind it has taken his particular preferences and packaged them in some of the most talked-about blockbuster spectacles of the modern age. Because if you want some puzzle to work out, some crisp and clean cinematography, and a non-linear narrative then you're obviously one of the many people to have enjoyed the work of Christopher Nolan. And this is essentially where his film career properly started.

Jeremy Theobald plays a struggling/aspiring writer (billed as "The Young Man") who spends a lot of his time observing random people in the street. He follows them for a while, considering what they may be getting up to with their lives. Unfortunately, or maybe not so unfortunately, The Young Man is caught in the act by a man named Cobb (Alex Haw). Cobb really doesn't want to be followed, mainly because he spends his time observing others, awaiting opportunities to enter their homes and cause some chaos while they're absent. The Young Man is appalled by this, but also intrigued. 

Taking a number of familiar noir elements (the morally "flexible" lead, the cool blonde, played by Lucy Russell, the spiralling journey towards an ending that isn't guaranteed to be happy for anyone involved), Following is a well-made neo-noir that works far better than expected, considering the low budget and limited resources. It's a bit dialogue-heavy, and some of the performances are a bit theatrical, but it's a very slick and entertaining way to spend 70 minutes.

Theobald is good in the main role, being led around by someone clearly out to have some fun with him. He grows more confident in his role, but never becomes as comfortable as the man showing him the ropes. Haw is fun, but he's the one who feels like the most theatrical performer, one raised eyebrow and cheeky grin away from looking at the audience and revealing the mechanics of whatever trick he is working on. Russell does well as The Blonde, and she's allowed to be more than just the vulnerable woman who may or may not also be a femme fatale. One or two others round out the small cast, including John Nolan as a policeman, but Nolan does well to keep the focus on the central trio for most of the runtime.

If you like the films of Christopher Nolan, and most people do, then you should find enough here to interest you. It's fascinating to see how his cine-literacy and talent shine through, despite working with the kind of budget that would now barely cover a week of catering on one of his major productions. He made a British crime film in the late 1990s that somehow, for better or worse, doesn't feel like a British crime film from the late 1990s. That's quite impressive. Even if every subsequent film has allowed him to earn enough success to completely overshadow this humble starting point.

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. All links are HERE.
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: Animals (2026)

Although a solid piece of work throughout, there's nothing much surprising about Animals, apart from the fact that it appears to be a remake of a film that isn't given any credit at all. Ben Affleck, here taking on directing, co-writing, and lead actor duties, may have mentioned it elsewhere, but it's certainly not something noted in the movie credits, as far as I could see.

Affleck plays Mark Kimball, a mayoral candidate at a very important juncture. He's struggling to ensure that he gets enough votes, his marriage to Abigail (Kerry Washington) isn't in the best place, and every move he makes and word he speaks is immediately pounced upon and dissected by those following his political journey. Then he receives a call informing him that his son is kidnapped. His advisor, Sam (Steven Yeun), puts him in contact with someone who has experience with these matters, Dayle Burton (Gillian Anderson), and so begins a tense negotiation, one that is as much about how things will be perceived as it is about the large sum of money involved.

There's little here to pick apart. The screenplay, by Connor O. McIntyre, Billy Ray, and Affleck, works well, pacing things nicely throughout the 106-minute runtime and adding every ingredient required to get the whole thing cooking by the third act. The performances are generally very good (with Washington, Yeun, and Anderson being the absolute best of the bunch, although I want to mention Adriana Paz and Luis Gerardo Méndez, both in pivotal supporting roles). Even the moral quandary that Kimball finds himself in is an intriguing and interesting one, considering the various factors at play.

It's just all a bit too familiar, and it would feel that way even to those who aren't aware of the source material. You have the good politician who is forced to "get his hands dirty". You have the idyllic marriage that is obviously crumbling beneath the surface. Anderson, as good as she is, plays the kind of "fixer" that we've seen a hundred times before. This is a good film, and those onscreen make it watchable, but it's probably the least of the features directed by Affleck.

You may have noticed that I haven't mentioned here what film(s) this is reworking. That's because I don't want to spoil the main plot development that twists everything around. Those who know the original will figure it out quite quickly. Others may be pleasantly surprised, and I hope they will then eventually check out the previous incarnations (note - it's not hard to find other articles citing the main influence on this).

Perhaps a bit too unclear when it comes to the points it is trying to make, Animals nevertheless IS at least trying. It's commenting on power, on taking control of a narrative, and even seems to be making a case to be more tolerant and understanding of the many illegal immigrants in the USA who can do the undesirable work that so many others cannot stomach. I had a good time with it while it was on, but I'll never have the urge to rewatch it.

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. All links are HERE.
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: Hallowarrior (2026)

I'm not coming here to tell you that Hallowarrior is a great movie. It's not an effective horror, nor is it an entertaining enough dark thriller with some gore thrown around. It is, however, a decent little bit of atmosphere that should pass the time pleasantly enough as we reach the end of the official spooky season.

It's Halloween night, which feels a bit different for a kid living in a post-apocalyptic landscape. Pumpkin (Milly Shapiro) really longs for some company, but she also knows how dangerous that could be. Which doesn't stop her eventually letting Thalia (Shannyn Sossamon), Royce (AJ Bowen), and Wendy (Ajani Russell) spend some time in her home. They seem friendly enough, once proper introductions have been made, but things might change when the visitors learn that nobody else is around to protect Pumpkin. Mind you, Pumpkin may be very capable of protecting herself.

The feature debut of writer-director Ben Sottak, this has enough to make it a decent calling card. It's economical (in terms of the scale and the 78-minute runtime), it looks decent throughout, making use of a colour palette that reflects the . . . Halloween-iness of it all, and there are a handful of very good moments between Pumpkin and the other female characters that she ends up interacting with.

Shapiro in the main role is, sadly, not the best fit. She never seems quite as capable or strong as she needs to be, although that's also due to the writing. Thankfully, she's surrounded by people who do well enough to make up for her mis-casting. Sossamon is allowed to present herself as gentle and caring for a lot of the runtime, playing nice until she decides that it's time not to be nice (to paraphrase Patrick Swayze in Road House), Bowen has more of an air of menace about him, and Russell does a good job of being the youngest visitor, and the one who might be likely to really befriend Pumpkin. There are some others who get screentime, but the heart of the movie is this central quartet.

What's missing here is a film more in line with the title. I was hoping for something a bit more inventive. There should have been more blurring of the lines between reality and a childish fantasy. The bursts of violence should have been just a bit more shocking. And I'm surprised that I didn't ever get the feeling that our young central character was ever close to being in real danger. 

I'm sure that Sottak is happy that he got his film made, and happy that it turned out so well. That's a huge achievement. It's just a shame that things couldn't have been improved before the final cut was put out to audiences. I would be tentatively hopeful if he announced a Hallowarrior 2 though, which shows that he at least did enough right to gain some goodwill from horror fans. 

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. All links are HERE.
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

Ice Cream Man (2026)

The best thing about Ice Cream Man is how easy it is to hate, and how easy it is to allow that hate to fuel a rant against how much it does so utterly and disappointingly wrong. It helps that Eli Roth (who really looks like the poster boy to be used when women are warned against leaving their drinks unguarded anywhere men are also present) has been making it easier to forget what some may view as his past glories. And this is coming from someone who had a blast with Thanksgiving when that was released, just a few years ago. 

If you look online to check other summaries of Ice Cream Man, you will see it described as a horror comedy, a black comedy slasher, or just a fun and gory romp surely designed around the motto "sundae, bloody sundae". It isn't any of those things. It's not funny, it has no thrills or chills, there are no interesting characters or plot developments, and the gore is so pathetic in showing how obviously Roth wants to tap in to the Terrifier income stream that it will make many simply roll their eyes. It's also worth noting that few of the special effects are any good, which is a great shame.

An ice cream man (Ari Millen) rolls into town. Most of the kids eat ice cream. Kids become murderous maniacs. That's all there is to this movie. Yes, a handful of young characters avoid the fate of so many others, leaving them charged with battling others and saving the town, and there's a tiresome, and very thin, backstory for the titular character, but that's it.

Roth, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Noah Belson, shows that he's no longer interested in being creative, if he ever really was. He's interested in being a brand, and in crossing over with other brands. That's the only explanation for this absolute trash, and horror movie fans deserve so much better than this.

Apparently intent on making every wrong decision at every possible moment, Roth fills the screen with poor jokes, poor computer effects that make you unable to appreciate the few decent practical moments, and some unnecessary generative AI that I can only hope comes back to bite him on the ass when someone feeds his own filmography into some program and asks it to spit out a gory horror movie titled something like "Hostel Fever". 

I don't want to take the time here to call out any of the cast members. Aside from Millen and Benjamin Byron Davis (someone who delivers the background exposition on the main character), nobody is doing very good work. They're not terrible either, but they don't do well enough to avoid being overshadowed by everything else that's wrong in almost every scene.

Those who want to pretend that this is just a harmless bit of nonsense that should amuse horror fans will probably view me as some uptight wuss. But I would ask those same people, if they are fans of Roth, to revisit his earlier work and then try to argue the point that we've not watched the journey of someone who has gone from being an exciting and passionate horror fanboy to a cynical and money-grubbing hack, with far too little talent, and probably far too big a cyber-wallet stuffed with various crypto-currencies. 

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. All links are HERE.
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

Crawlers (2026)

If you have arachnophobia then you're not going to have a good time watching Crawlers, which is the best, and most entertaining, spider horror film since . . . well, Arachnophobia. 

Matilda Lutz is Serena, the put-upon caretaker/handywoman at Paradiso Palms apartments, a building about to become home to some very aggressive spiders. They're not super-sized, although some are a bit bigger than others, but they're fast and mean, and determined to keep getting inside people to feed and breed. Once the building gets locked down, by scientists who don't initially realise that the problem is an arachnid one, Serena ends up trying to rescue a baby, look after young Molly (Andrea Scott), and enlist the help of a very capable and unflappable dominatrix named Lady Lash (Melina Matthews).

Written by Jayson Rothwell, Crawlers is a complete checklist of things you don't ever want to see if you live with a major fear of spiders. Spiders in the kitchen cupboard, including one or two in a coffee cup = check. Spiders crawling into a shoe = check. Spider visible when you rip some sheets off the end of the loo roll = check. Spider crawling into a packet of snack food = check. There are one or two other key visuals, but you get the idea. The first half of this film is absolute nightmare fuel for people like me. It's also full of things being set up that you just know will be paid off in the third act. It's not exactly sophisticated stuff, and some may dislike the way the tone becomes sillier and lighter after such a tense opening act, but it's exactly what I needed to stop me from hyperventilating every time I saw another spider scurrying across the screen.

Director Ángel Gómez Hernández doesn't have the biggest filmography, having helmed a couple of features and numerous shorts, but he knows exactly what to do here, showcasing some gnarly gore and gooey moments, while working with the screenplay to keep viewers dancing back and forth as they watch events unfold and wonder how much they can tolerate.

Lutz is very good in the lead role, and she's allowed to be tough and determined in a way that doesn't make her seem blinkered and stupid. Matthews is a lot of fun, and it's a nice surprise to watch her character become more important on the way to the finale. Scott is fine, if not particularly memorable, Gary Anthony Stennette is welcome when he appears as a scientist who eventually figures out what exactly is going on, and William Miller steals a couple of scenes as Mr. Rossmore, the money-hungry asshole owner of the building.

Using certain criteria, Crawlers isn't great. But using the criteria specific to entertaining spider-filled horror movies, it ends up very close to the top of the pile. I recommend it to everyone who breaks out in cold sweat as I do whenever a spider is spotted crawling across the living room carpet, even if (like me) you end up swearing a lot while averting your eyes from some of the more incy wincy "highlights". 

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. All links are HERE.
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

Prime Time: Highway To Hell (1991)

If you're going to watch one horror comedy that features a moment in which Gilbert Gottfried portrays Hitler then Highway To Hell is the film for you.

Charlie Sykes (Chad Lowe) and Rachel Clark (Kristy Swanson) are two young lovers driving to Las Vegas, where they are going to get married. That should be a lovely road trip for them, but it's interrupted when they end up in the sights of a dangerous and unrelenting Hell Cop AKA Sgt. Bedlam (C. J. Graham). The cop snatches Rachel away, leaving Charlie to put his pedal to the metal and drive through a portal to hell, where he encounters various characters and hopes to save his kidnapped bride-to-be.

Directed by Ate de Jong, who amused people with the anarchic madness of Drop Dead Fred just one year before, this is a natural next step, considering it remains quite wild and whacky, but just replaces Rik Mayall with a number of tricky and tortured denizens of the underworld. That ensures that things aren't quite as entertaining, but it also allows the director, and writer Brian Helgeland, to allow time and space for much more than just one star performance.

Lowe is perfectly fine in the main role, playing someone who seems sweet and good enough, and Swanson makes for a very believable "prize" to be snatched away by the main baddie. Graham may not be asked to add anything to his character, but he does well to continually ooze menace and impatience as he aims to keep the central couple separated. Patrick Bergin is good in the role of Beezle, someone who could be aiming to help or hinder our hero (the clue is very much in the name though), young Jarrett Lennon is a kid named Adam who hopes to also get home one day, and the aforementioned Gottfried steals his scene, despite competition from the likes of the Stiller family (Amy, Jerry, and Ben) and Lita Ford in a hugely entertaining sequence that plays out at about a third of the way into the film.

While it cannot cover up the relatively low budget, nor can it really bring things together in a way that feels entirely cohesive and properly satisfying in a narrative sense, Highway To Hell aims to keep you entertained and amused throughout, and it largely succeeds. 

Some people like this a lot more than I do, and I can understand the appeal of this if it was something first discovered on the shelves of your local movie rental emporium, but I cannot imagine many genre films taking an active dislike to it. It's oddly cute in how it lets everything play out, a horror-tinged fantasy that you just know wants people to be rooting for the plucky underdog to save the woman he loves and ultimately save the day. Helgeland may have a filmography that now largely overshadows this one, but I think it's a little gem worth remembering and revisiting occasionally. 

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. All links are HERE.
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

Clayface (2026)

Another day, another comic book property. This one tries to do things a bit differently though, and is all the better for it. It's much more of a body horror, and those with no previous knowledge of the character should be happy enough to watch it for the thrills and special effects. It just happens to be set in Gotham City.

Tom Rhys Harries plays Matt Hagen, a handsome young actor who appears to have the world at his feet. Things all go wrong when he decides to flirt and dance, and more, with Mia (Joana Ribeiro). Mia is actually the girlfriend of Markos Szabo (David Dencik), a major criminal who doesn't take well to the situation. Hagen is disfigured, the preceding legal actions don't go his way, and he ends up going broke, with no route back to his previous life. Until he encounters the work of Caitlyn Corr (Naomi Ackie). Corr is working on a revolutionary new way to repair and reshape flesh, which is exactly what Hagen needs. It's all untested on humans though, and it turns out that some of the side-effects are amplified when a desperate Hagen overdoses on the formula. He finds that he can shape his body in a number of fantastic ways. More importantly, he can also transform himself to look exactly like someone else. Before you can say "it's been a while since I watched Darkman", Hagen starts to become Clayface, and stays focused on deadly revenge.

With a screenplay credited to Mike "current critical darling of the horror genre" Flanagan and Hossein Amini, and direction from James Watkins (who has been helming a wide variety of successful genre movies for almost two decades now), Clayface is, first and foremost, a fun mix of body horror and standard revenge thriller. The 108-minute runtime zips by quickly enough, and the screenplay keeps viewers informed of every development in a way that allows for each subsequent set-pieces throughout the movie to become better and bolder. Watkins directs with an emphasis on energy and fun, but also manages to effectively incorporate the darkness and pain of the central character in a way that somehow doesn't unbalance everything. 

While not as consistent as other elements of the film, the acting is generally good from all of the main players. Harries does an excellent job in the main role, even when his performance is being complemented/covered up by some great practical effects and computer work. Ackie is the other highlight, although I expect nothing less than brilliance from her by this point. Dencik is suitably mean and brutal, Ribeiro has moments of being a typically tempting femme fatale, and there are entertainingly obvious performances from the likes of Joshua James, Corey Johnson, Jake Curran, and Eddie Marsan. And a fun cameo from Rob Brydon. Yes, Rob Brydon. The weakest performance comes from Max Minghella, playing a cop, and also the partner of Ackie's character, but that comes as no surprise, considering the fact that Minghella seems to have done nothing in years to dissuade me of the notion that his entire acting career stems from little more than his surname.

Mind you, it's hard to judge every cast member here when they have to deliver some of the most on the nose dialogue I've heard in a long time. Almost every other line refers to someone's look, face, or transformation, and it sometimes feels as if the writers had a book titled "The Dummies Guide To Writing Movies Where You Run Metaphors Parallel To Actual Unfolding Events". It becomes tiresome way before the halfway point, and isn't helped by the fact that a lot of the rest of the movie is based around a number of reveals that are absolutely predictable to anyone who has watched even a handful of other revenge movies.

Thankfully, so many other things help to distract viewers. There's decent cinematography from Rob Hardy, another impressive score from Volker Bertelmann, and editing from Jon Harris that is as accomplished as it is essential to a number of the best moments in the film. The final extended set-piece, in a club populated by a number of henchmen and the big boss man, is a real treat for the senses, and I only hope that there's some way to recapture that feeling when we get the inevitable sequel. I'll feel reassured if Watkins returns to continue whatever story interests him most.

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. All links are HERE.
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

Mubi Monday: Faust (1926)

It's time. 100 years have passed, and I decided against selling my soul in exchange for avoiding having to write this review. Everyone knows the idea of Faust, even if they don't realise it. Faustian pacts have become more and more commonplace, in both fiction and reality (apparently), and we can only hope that some who have sold their souls for power, money, and much more, are coming to the time when their payment is due.

Directed by F. W. Murnau (delivering audiences an achievement that would arguably be surpassed by Fritz Lang one year later, helming the incredible Metropolis), Faust is an impressive production that shows viewers the classic tale of the titular character (Gösta Ekman) being offered a deal by Mephisto (Emil Jannings) that could lead to him getting everything he wants, which includes the lovely Gretchen (Camilla Horn). It could also lead to him having much more to lose though.

Another film that would make a nice introductory work for those wary of diving into silent cinema, Faust somehow manages to keep everything simple enough, yet explores the central idea in a way that nicely fills out the 107-minute runtime. The intertitles, written first by Hans Kyser and then rewritten by Gerhart Hauptmann, set the tone and clearly underline the main characters about to play their parts in this dark fable.

Ekman is very good in the main role, although many of the scenes show how his choice reverberates through the lives of those around him, and Horn is a believably sweet and lovely Gretchen. Jannings steals the show though, of course, as the dastardly Mephisto. He's the villain of the piece, but also just the one character very much aware of the fallibility of humans. Werner Fuetterer has to stay resolute and optimistic as the archangel banking on humans actually being good and worthy of their existence, a job he does very well, and Frida Richard, Yvette Guilbert, and William Dieterle play relatives of Gretchen, and all throw various spanners in the works. 

I could recommend other interpretations of this tale, from the traditional to the modernised and redressed, but I certainly believe that everyone should make time for this version, at least once. It's an enduring classic, despite the technological progress made throughout the last century that helps to make it seem much more crude and stilted, and you could do a lot worse than fill up a dark winter evening with the likes of this, Nosferatu, and Haxan.

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. All links are HERE.
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: #Alive (2020)

A 2020 zombie movie that spends most of the runtime alongside one young man stuck inside his own apartment, #Alive could be considered THE 2020 zombie movie, whether by accident or by design. It's certainly a more interesting viewing experience when you think back on that year, especially how so many people found company and ways to create some kind of community with strangers and/or friends online.

Yoo Ah-in plays our main character, someone who likes to spend most of his time gaming and having fun with his friends on the internet. That fun is interrupted when it becomes impossible to ignore a deadly zombie epidemic. Our hero is soon trapped and isolated, only able to watch the nightmare unfolding around him without daring to take any risks that would involve leaving his home. He's soon considering a very final solution to his predicament when a young woman (Park Shin-hye) in a building opposite manages to signal to him. Maybe they can work together to survive the situation. 

Written and directed by Cho Il-Yung, based on a screenplay by Matt Naylor (filmed as Alone, also released in 2020), #Alive is certainly something that should be on your radar if you're interested in the many impressive horror movies that have been coming out of South Korea for some time now. It has a couple of decent set-pieces, even if they're relatively small in scale, and the main characters are believable and likeable.

What it doesn't have, unfortunately, is quite enough to distract from the limited location and what seems to be a relatively small budget. Both Ah-in and Shin-hye work well together, but the film, for obvious reasons, keeps them apart for a lot of the runtime. There are also too few encounters with the very dangerous zombie masses. And one sequence showing our main character solving a big problem doesn't actually feel as if it would solve his big problem, considering how the whole area is impacted by the outbreak.

I guess timing is everything, although I'm not sure whether I would have liked this more or less if I'd watched it back when I felt as trapped and isolated as the main character. Those strange times throughout 2020 and 2021 certainly ensure that this feels a bit more resonant though, and the title being a hashtag is just one more way in which it feels like a survival horror for those who spent some time during the COVID pandemic using hashtags to sync up and "meet up" with online friends.

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. All links are HERE.
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: Jitters (2026)

As much as I complain about it and act confused, I know why many British movies with limited budgets do their best to mix in a number of accents and keep shooting scenes in a way that make so many locations seem equally anonymous. It's a marketing tactic. A way to sell your product as more than just a "British low-budget horror". Sadly, it almost always gets my hackles up. It makes me feel as if a film has been made more by people who want to increase their sales opportunities than people who have faith in their material. Don't get me wrong, I know that a lot of people want to increase their sales, even if it's just by a small enough margin to let them continue creating more of the art that they want to focus on, but I don't need that to be the main thing overshadowing every other element of a movie. 

Much like every other horror movie looking to cash in on current tech fears, Jitters is about deadly AI. Sort of. People are dying, and it all seems to be linked to a game featuring a character called Jitters (Daniel Jordan). It's up to Detective Collymore (Fabrizio Santino) to get to the bottom of things, but he's also busy trying to navigate a post-divorce life with his young daughter (Izzy, played by Chloe Hews).

If you scour the internet looking for general opinions on Jitters then, thanks to real-life AI, you will find a number of word salad pieces that praise various elements and rate the film as a decent techno-horror. Ironically, that's one of the major downsides of AI right now. It has made it harder to find real words written by real people about real things, whether those words are opinions or facts. So for those who manage to get around the algorithm and find their way here, let me be very blunt . . . Jitters is crap.

Only the second feature directed by Marc Zammit, but already a step down from his debut (Witch, featuring a number of the same creative people involved), this feels lazy, careless, and painfully unscary. There's no tension, partly because of the poor plotting and partly because of the underwritten characters giving you nobody worth rooting for. And as for some of the stranger decisions . . . it's not as if every decision needs to be fully explained, but some of them seem to have no good reason for being here, except to potentially benefit those aforementioned sales opportunities.

The cast is a very mixed bag. I'll be nice enough to avoid commenting too much on Santino's lead performance, and I'll be even nicer by remembering to mention that Hews isn't bad as his young daughter. Jordan tries to do well as the dastardly Jitters, but he isn't given a proper direction for his performance. He should be scary or fun, or an unnerving mix of the two, but he's just someone who seems to like the sound of his own voice as he spouts nonsense about the game and the players. Linda-Jean Barry is much better than the film deserves in her role as the exposition-delivering Dr. Harriet Brooks, and everyone else here feels as if they might just be happy enough adding another title to their C.V. (which can then be padded out with AI, and lost in a shuffle of other AI-embellished filmographies)

Jitters wants to join many other films and voices telling you that AI is very scary and dangerous. It undoubtedly is, but mostly because it helps to exponentially increase two of the worst habits that so many opportunists are guilty of: thoughtlessness and laziness. 

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. All links are HERE.
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

Frailty (2001)

Despite the fact that it has a very good reputation in the horror film fan community, Frailty remains a film that I believe rarely gets as much love as it deserves. The first of only two feature films directed by Bill Paxton, who also helps himself by casting himself in a pivotal role, Frailty is a beautiful balance of character study and straightforward supernatural chills. It's also an interesting look at how anyone would struggle to deal with a loved one they view as having some kind of mental health breakdown.

Matthew McConaughey plays a man who walks into see FBI Agent Wesley Doyle (Powers Boothe) and claims to be able to lead him to the location of an active serial killer currently riding high in the "most wanted" charts. Doyle disbelieves him at first, of course, but soon finds out a few details that have him intrigued. There's a long story to be told, one involving two young brothers brought up by a father who has been tasked by an angel to identify and destroy demons, but everything should be revealed by the time our two main characters arrive at their final destination, a rose garden where the killer may be resting.

The only feature written by Brent Hanley, this is a very satisfying tale that allows viewers to stay one step behind various characters without ever feeling as if they're being deliberately manipulated or mishandled. The third act may be where things all come to a satisfying conclusion, but the first two acts allow for plenty of moments to think about how you yourself would react if put in the situation that the two young boys find themselves. The 100-minute runtime is just right, allowing every brush stroke needed for the final artwork without things feeling slow or drawn out.

McConaughey is excellent, giving the kind of performance that made many horror fans wonder why it took so long to get to the proper McConaissance (as I believe it was termed). Boothe has to spend a lot of the movie being the stand in for viewers, he's the sounding board and the cynical questioner, a job he does very well throughout. It's not a major role, in many ways, but he's also just as important as anyone else onscreen. Paxton gives one of his best performances, which is really saying something when you think about all of his great work, and both Matt O'Leary and Jeremy Sumpter do very well to hold their own in scenes with him, both of them believable as young boys with very different views on their situation, one believing in their father and one absolutely appalled by what is going on. Luke Askew and Derek Cheetwood portray other members of law enforcement, Missy Crider and Cynthia Ettinger do fantastic with very small amounts of screentime, and Edmond Scott Ratliff is glimpsed very briefly as an angel who may or may not be real.

Frailty isn't perfect, but it comes pretty close. It weaves such a powerful spell that anyone who has watched it once will want to make time for at least one repeat viewing. A lot of the work is done by Hanley's screenplay and Paxton's direction, but it would be doing a huge disservice to the cast members to dismiss their contributions. It's ironically appropriate that Frailty is a delicate and fragile piece of work, but it's undeniable that everyone involved did their bit to ensure that it would stay intact and hold up to scrutiny when handed over to the viewing public. Make time to rewatch it soon if you've not seen it for many years. Or clear your schedule if you've yet to see it for the very first time. 

9/10

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. All links are HERE.
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