For It Is Man's Number: anthology

Showing posts with label anthology. Show all posts

Saturday, 18 October 2025

Shudder Saturday: V/H/S/Halloween (2025)

Did I ever expect the V/H/S horror anthology series to become something of a tradition around this time of year? I did not. Am I happy enough with this development? I am. Which is why I was happy to get around to watching V/H/S/Halloween, despite being hugely disappointed by the previous entry in the series, V/H/S/Beyond.

It's the normal format. You get half a dozen stories with a wraparound tale interspersed between each one. Each story is distinctly pumpkin-flavoured this time around, and the wraparound tale - showing a group of people testing out a new fizzy drink on some unsuspecting subjects - is my favourite of the entire series.

Although the various segments vary wildly in tone, from the Willy Wonka surreal silliness and the body horror of "Fun Size" (my personal favourite, written and directed by Casper Kelly) to the very dark and disturbing "KidPrint" (written and directed by Alex Ross Perry), everything has a sense of belonging to the bigger picture. That's all thanks to the easy linking theme of Halloween, with many of the segments allowing the film-makers to simply revel in all of the seasonal atmosphere. Once Bryan M. Ferguson has set the tone with the first of the wraparouns sections, Anna Zlokovic starts things strong with the bonkers "Coochie Coochi Coo". Things then seem to settle down a bit with "Ut Supra Sic Infra" (co-written by Alberto Marini and director Paco Plaza), but there's an ending that delivers exactly what you expect from it. Then it's "Fun Size", perfectly placed in the middle of the movie. "KidPrint" comes along after that, one that some will find hard to stomach as things get worse and worse, before the whole thing ends in a double-whammy of the hugely entertaining "Home Haunt" (co-written and co-directed by Micheline Pitt-Norman and R. H. Norman) and a superb wraparound punchline.

There's not too much else to say about this though, and it can often be difficult to fully review and discuss anthology horror movies. The point of them is to draw you in and lead you to a great ending with every segment, which this does. To say too much about any one tale is to spoil the potential delight. Just know that this is a very strong entry in this series, and perhaps my new favourite. While everyone will inevitably react to the different segments in different ways, those who know the vibe and aesthetic of the films will be unlikely to be disappointed by this. The main concepts are often built around a great mix of fun and frights, the acting feels better than it has been in some of the previous instalments, and the end result is just a perfect horror "mix-tape" that will be even better to watch as you're sitting in the dark with the glow of a candle-lit pumpkin creating some lively shadows in the corners of the room.

A huge turnaround from the last movie, although I may eventually rewatch that one and revise my harsh opinion of it, this not only kept me very entertained throughout, it had me wishing we could fast forward to next year and see what we'll get next in this series. I raise a hot cup of pumpkin-spiced latte to all involved.

8/10

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

Tuesday, 8 July 2025

Hauntology (2024)

Although I am late getting to this review of Hauntology, as I am late getting to a number of reviews for films that I watched in one great weekend a few weeks ago, I have been motivated to be more positive and upbeat about it after seeing a general consensus for it that I deem to be unfairly harsh. Hauntology is a horror anthology with a nice strand of LGBTQ+ identity weaving throughout every main sequence, and it stands out as a great example of how to do this kind of thing well.

The framing device concerns Jazmin (Samantha Russell) tracking down her upset sister, Venus (Jaidyn Triplett). Venus is upset because she can't trust her parents to support her as she explores her sexuality and identity, and Jazmin understands some of her misgivings. Jazmin also knows the history of their town though, and some past spirits that are always after an opportunity to create some trouble in the present.

Written and directed by Parker Brennon, this is in line with a lot of other horror anthologies. Not every segment works as well as it could, but there's enough variety to ensure that most viewers should find at least one or two tales worthy of their time. You get four separate stories, and there are elements that work their way into the unfolding tale of Jazmin and Venus. The first feels very similar to what is arguably the best part of Tales From The Darkside: The Movie, the second is the one I was least entertained by, the third is a fun riff on the kind of thing that would feature in any Hammer/Amicus anthology, and the final tale is the most classic, in terms of the genre trappings and spooky atmosphere. Each sequence also explores racism and homophobia, in different ways, mixing in everyday tensions and fears with the supernatural.

Brennon somehow manages to keep things consistent while allowing every individual tale to feel different enough from the others surrounding it. Everything looks and sounds great throughout, particularly impressive for an independent feature, and I would be very disappointed if this doesn't provide Brennon with a stepping stone to whatever they might want to do next.

Russell and Triplett are both very good in their roles, which makes it easier to put up with anyone onscreen who isn't quite as good. I can't think of anyone who really lets the team down though. Ace Rosas and Zoey Luna stand out in the first tale, Jacinda Forbes is very good as the heart of the second tale, Aaron Turnbull, Kurt Oberhaus, and Samantha Robinson provide some fun in the third tale, and James DeForest Parker, Nancy Loomis, and Annie Fitzpatrick do such good work in the fourth tale that they may make you wish that they'd also been used elsewhere in the film. Lindsey McDowell also deserves a mention, as do Abigail Esmena, Aubree Bowen, Naomi Grossman, and one or two others I obviously cannot think of right at this moment.

Maybe I'm speaking out of turn, but I feel like we horror fans are always on the lookout for the next great horror anthology. There are plenty to check out, but many of them nowadays are created by simply stitching together shorts helmed by different directors. Hauntology has one individual at the helm, one voice telling the tales, and that helps it to feel far superior to the many patchwork portmanteaus that are usually mentioned when people ask for horror anthology recommendations.

8/10

Friday, 4 July 2025

The Brooklyn Butcher (2025)

It's great to be able to spend my time watching so many movies, and to then have this outlet for reviewing those movies. It's also always a balancing act though. My brain wants to watch every movie around, despite me knowing how impossible that is. My brain also knows that I have to get a review done every day. I know that the world won't end if I don't get my thoughts down, and I am well aware that the world is not waiting with bated breath for my opinion on everything I watch, but it's still a very strong compulsion/habit/memory aid nowadays. Why did I mention it being a balancing act? Well, there are only so many hours in each day. I don't get paid for any of my writing (nobody would be quite that insane), which means I have to focus on my day job and plan everything else accordingly. Which means sometimes I am reviewing movies a week or two after viewing them. Which is the case here. That's not always a big deal, but with something as low-budget and independent as The Brooklyn Butcher time is of the essence.

What you have here is a film that is listed in many places as a horror, but that's not really the case. It uses some horror genre trappings, but there are a few different genres played around with in a fun anthology that moves around the various residents of an apartment building that may well be the recent playground of the titular killer. While not always successful in achieving whatever it is striving for, The Brooklyn Butcher is admirably amusing and steadfastly unique throughout, serving as a decent calling card for co-writer/co-director Joshua R. Pangborn.

I wanted to like this more than I did, but there's nothing here that is actually bad. You have to know that it's made with very little money, although it looks and sounds much better than some movies made with a hundred times the budget, it's aiming to throw plenty at the walls in the hope that some things stick, and it very much belongs to the many films we have helping to make up the ever-growing selection of genre films that can make up part of the LGBTQ+ cinematic rainbow. I will say that a very fun opening scene actually worked against it, leaving me wanting more of that scenario as the film instead jumped to spend time with other characters, but everyone tries hard to deliver consistent fun.

Pangborn and Johnathan Cerio try to pack a number of good twists and turns into their screenplay, alongside many individual lines that should make viewers smile or chuckle, and they also take a turn at portraying a couple of characters in front of the camera. The same goes for Stuart Kiczek, credited as both a segment director and the character of Dmitri Jeffries.

The rest of the cast includes Paul Antzoulis, Andrew Carter, Jahir Christian, Alexander Colon, Alexander Dorf, Mark-Eugene Garcia, Jonny Gottsegen, Greg Hoffman, Dhafir Jackson, James King, Alvin Christmas, Anthony J. Smith, and Ashley Monique Menard, as well as a few others I don't have the time or space to namecheck here. Everyone deserves recognition though, and they're all in line with the tone and intention of the film.

It should be clear that I liked this, but I have to say that I didn't love it. I wanted to, and I absolutely admire what Pangborn and co. have achieved with the obvious limitations restricting them, but the good only just outweighs the bad, and the best moments make the weaker moments a bit more frustrating. That can happen with any anthology though, and I would easily rewatch this ahead of some better-known titles. (Creepshow 3, I'm looking at you)

6/10

Friday, 16 May 2025

Freaky Tales (2025)

Written and directed by Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck, Freaky Tales is a film that I decided to watch this week with very low expectations. I hadn't really heard too much about it, and there was certainly nobody telling people to make it a priority. Maybe it was due to those low expectations, or maybe simply due to the movie itself, but I had a blast with it.

Set in Oakland in 1987, this is an anthology film showing four interconnected stories. You get some young punks who end up battling Nazis outside one of their clubs, a pair of young women who get a chance to show off their rap battle skills on a stage opposite a well-known star, a debt collector/killer renting a movie for his pregnant wife, unaware of the fact that they've been targeted by someone he caused pain to in the past, and a super-powered basketball player who goes on a killing spree after a robbery-gone-awry leads to things going really bad really quickly.

Boden and Fleck have been working together for about two decades now, and they have a filmography that refuses to be pigeonholed, but this may be their most enjoyable work yet. It's so fun and satisfying, partly down to the aesthetic and energy of the whole thing and partly down to the timing of it (because this is a perfect time to enjoy any film that features people beating up on Nazi scumbags). Jac Fitzgerald delivers some cool cinematography, straightforward stuff with just a few flourishes here and there, and the score by Raphael Saadiq is an excellent selection of synth work.

Pedro Pascal and Ben Mendelsohn are the biggest names in the cast, when it comes to the main roles anyway. The former plays that debt collector/killer, obviously perfect as the reluctant heavy who becomes quite morose and soulful when his world is irrevocably changed, while the latter is a horrible cop who is unsurprisingly connected to a number of the Nazis. The late Angus Cloud does well as a bad guy named Travis, Jack Champion and Ji-young Yoo are easy to like, playing the two main punks we spend time with, and Dominique Thorne and Normani are great fun as the rapping duo wary of being made a laughing stock while they have a chance to show what they can do in front of a big crowd. Tom Hanks appears for a cameo that lasts just a few minutes, and he's a hell of an addition to the thing, and Jay Ellis dominates the final section of the film, giving us a character who feels like Jim Kelly spliced with Cameron Vale.

Although it would seem to have a layer of grime and unpleasantness wrapped around everything, Freaky Tales works so well because it's a celebration. It celebrates love, it celebrates those who pursue their dreams, it celebrates a time and a place (and we can all think back to our own special venue that may have had a similar peak time many years ago, or maybe just seems that way through our nostalgia goggles), and it celebrates the joy of fighting back against truly despicable humans. The message couldn't be clearer, and there's some violence on display that is as satisfying as it is over the top, but that lack of subtlety feels like a refreshing drink of cool water in a time when so many others are considering compromise or ways to appeal to those who wouldn't appreciate such a message.

If this was only a selection of tales that said "it's always okay to punch a Nazi" then I would have been fine with it, but it's got a lot more packed into it. I REALLY liked it, and I hope others have as much fun with it as I did.

8/10

Saturday, 5 October 2024

Shudder Saturday: V/H/S/Beyond (2024)

The V/H/S movie series has been going for over a decade now. There are now seven main movies in the main series, plus one or two spin-offs. Considering that it seemed destined to end back in 2014, when V/H/S: Viral seemed to garner little more than shrugs from many viewers, it's an enduring anthology format that I am happy to see endure. Maybe now is the right time to bring it to a close though.

I'm not going to run through the cast this time around, nor am I going to provide a summary of each main tale. Suffice to say that we get six stories given an oddly polished wraparound structure, with most of the individual segments revolving around dangerous encounters with alien creatures. One tale allows Kate Siegel to direct work written by her husband, Mike Flanagan. Another tale is written and directed by brothers Christian and Justin Long, the latter clearly taking inspiration from his 2014 horror collaboration with Kevin Smith.

Clocking in at just under 2 hours, the second-longest film in the series after the first, the biggest problem here is a pervading air of laziness, as well as a lack of imagination. What was once a fun aesthetic choice, using the retro feel to provide a twist on a number of well-worn horror genre tropes, now feels like it's just the result of people filming things with a filter you could find on a multitude of apps. And that's before we get to the special effects, that often feel like AI clip art, clumsily inserted into sequences that are akin to bits of silliness people could knock together with a basic bit of tech savviness and their smart phones.

As a brand name, for better or worse, the V/H/S series was a fairly easy way to allow film-makers to have some fun while perhaps pushing against the restrictions of the found-footage form. This still allows film-makers to have some fun, but there are no longer any restrictions, which leaves viewers saddled with inferior content that is supposed to be excused by the specific stylistic choice. The first main segment in this has a score pulsating beneath the visuals, for Chrissakes (something that I guess we're just supposed to acceopt because of the framing device, which just isn't good enough). Past V/H/S segments may have had the same mis-steps, whether in the audio department or in how the camera footage is edited together, but I cannot say for sure. All I can tell you is that things feel much worse here, and if we all just sit back and accept this, because it's better than nothing, then we'll be endorsing it, and encouraging them to keep making more.

Most anthology horror movies have at least one segment that works. This has one dud after another. If more care had been taken with the first main "tape" (Stork) then I would have at least mentioned that as a highlight, but it is all undone by the extra editing and soundtrack choices that undermine it.

Not one I can recommend, in case you were in any doubt, and the absolute nadir of the series . . . so far.

3/10

Tuesday, 3 September 2024

Kinds Of Kindness (2024)

It is time, once again, for director Yorgos Lanthimos to present a dark, and darkly comedic, film for fans to be equal parts entertained and repelled by, helped again by writer Efthimis Filippou. If you've ever wondered just how much Yorgos Lanthimos could fit into a film directed and co-written by Yorgos Lanthimos then this might just definitively answer that. ALL the Lanthimosity is here, and it runs through three equally bizarre tales that are presented in 164 minutes of "kindness".

Don't take this the wrong way, but there's not much point in covering the three stories presented here in great detail. I initially considered it, viewing them as separate from one another, but then I came to the conclusion that they are all basically the same story told in slightly different ways. People have their loyalty tested, and they are often in pursuit of someone they believe will fix anything that has suddenly gone wrong in their life. There's also at least one moment of wince-inducing violence.

There are four main cast members - Emma Stone, Jesse Plemons, Mamoudou Athie, Willem Dafoe, Margaret Qualley, and Hong Chau - used to portray various characters throughout the three tales, with three of these performers having already worked so well with Lanthimos in Poor Things. Everyone seems to put complete trust in their director, giving the kind of strangely mannered performances that run through the entire Lanthimos filmography, but it's Plemons who feels like the newcomer excelling in a way that will surely see him added to the core group of regulars.

The script is about as odd as anything else that Lanthimos and Filippou have given us, and I am aware of what I am measuring it against. Few things are fully explained, which can lead to a small amount of irritation, but also one or two brilliant surprises, and there's never a feeling of this being in anything close to the real world. It's a Lanthimos world, although this time he seems to have applied a filter to his work that mixes in some David Lynch and Rod Serling. It's a big gamble, and if you don't like the earliest scenes then you are unlikely to enjoy any of it, but it will satisfy those who may have been worried about recent successes softening the edges of the director.

For something so lengthy and strange, there's not actually that much more to say about it. It's . . . lengthy and strange. I think it's a bit over-indulgent, but I was also happy to be entertained and bewildered by every minute of it. It also made me want to revisit his past few movies, which kind of shows how well it fits in with his developing filmography, despite the anthology format making it feel like a bit of a departure from what he has done previously.

Some directors give their fans what they want and it then turns out that they wanted something a bit different. I don't think that is the case here. Lanthimos has found a fanbase receptive to his art, which has afforded him more opportunities to make more of it, and the end result is a win win. I am already growing impatient to see what he delivers next.

8/10

Saturday, 17 August 2024

Shudder Saturday: Tales That Witness Madness (1973)

If you can't settle on what one movie to watch at any time then you may as well pick an anthology movie. That is my motto . . . that I just made up for the sake of starting this review with some kind of justification for my choice here. But there's some truth to it. I always tend to enjoy anthology horrors whenever I stumble across one that I have yet to see, and the format allows me to remain optimistic even if one segment isn't working for me. Not every anthology is a winner though, and Tales That Witness Madness is one of the bad ones, which perhaps explains why I never made time for it before now.

The framing device may sound familiar to those who are fans of a certain other, much more celebrated, anthology horror film from the mighty Amicus (and it should be noted that this is decidedly NOT an Amicus film, despite sharing certain qualities). A psychiatrist (Donald Pleasence) is guiding a new colleague (Jack Hawkins) around the Asylum he is due to work in, and tales are told that show a number of key patients being housed there after incidents that would appear to feature the supernatural.

Although I was unfamiliar with writer Jennifer Jayne (credited here as Jay Fairbank), I was very familiar with director Freddie Francis, a legendary figure in British cinema who worked well as a director on films of highly varying quality, but who is also celebrated for his cinematography in films he didn't helm (perhaps most notably on The Elephant Man). Francis did some of his best work throughout the 1960s, especially when working with Hammer or Amicus, and initially seemed as if he was going to do just as well throughout the 1970s, but 1973 feels like the starting point for a downward slide. This may have been due to a lack of the right material, or it may have been the case that Francis was floundering, alongside many colleagues from the big British studios that he worked with, as great changes in the tastes and limits of acceptability rippled throughout the average horror movie viewers.

Aside from Jayne and Francis, this suffers from having a cast that just doesn't have enough star power to make up for the quartet of weak tales. Hawkins and Pleasence are very good, but sadly not onscreen enough, and other positives are Suzy Kendall, Joan Collins (hampered by the fact that she's in what is surely one of the most bonkers horror anthology segments ever), Kim Novak, and Leon Lissek. I am not saying everyone else is awful, although one or two are, but they're generally just there, unable to do anything to distract from the poor writing.

I was hoping that I would watch this and then be able to recommend it as a bit of a forgotten gem, but that was not to be. This is dire, although the first tale did remind me of a short story by Ray Bradbury, which gave me a glimmer of hope that was soon dashed, and the third tale (that one featuring Collins) is memorable for the hilarious lunacy of the central concept. Nothing here is really worth witnessing, sadly.

3/10

Saturday, 7 October 2023

Shudder Saturday: V/H/S/85 (2023)

Although it has had a number of wobbles here and there, the V/H/S series has become an enduring, and largely satisfying, horror anthology series. Others may disagree, but that's my opinion and this is my space for sharing my opinions on movies. I appreciate the commitment to the aesthetic, I have loved some of the wilder tales, and some of the imagery has been up there with the weirdest and wildest in the horror genre. So I was looking forward to this latest instalment, V/H/S/85.

I'm not even sure to begin with this review. I suppose I should simply say that I REALLY disliked this. It is easily the worst in the series, taking that position previously held by V/H/S: Viral, and the worst part is that very few of the stories have that sense of glee present in the rest of the series. Although two "punchlines" worked well enough to make me smirk.

There's a wraparound tale, helmed by David Bruckner, about a life-form being observed in a lab. The first of the main tales, directed by Mike P. Nelson, then shows us a group of people fooling around by a lake. All is well and good until it isn't, and this was my favourite tale, especially when it connected and was given a proper resolution later in the film. Then it's on to Gigi Saul Guerrero's tale of people trying to escape the devastating effects of an earthquake that has caused carnage in Mexico. Natrasha Kermani then brings us a retro-tech tale that delivers some gore while also mocking pretentious performance art. We then get Nelson returning, his second segment as enjoyable as it is disappointingly brief. I would rather have had more of this than the time wasted with a couple of other tales, including the next one, a twisted serial killer gorefest directed by Scott Derrickson that has a young man being able to record dreams that prophecise the future.

As well as the directors just mentioned also writing their segments, with the exception of Bruckner and Kermani, who are given story credits, writing comes from C. Robert Cargill, Zoe Cooper, and Evan Dickson. I cannot muster the enthusiasm to specify exactly who is responsible for each segment, so everyone can share the blame and the small amount of praise in equal measure.

As for the cast, most of them do perfectly fine within the limitations of the style, although the only people who stand out are those involved in the segments helmed by Mike P. Nelson, thanks to the fact that they are given a decent amount of time to show their interactions with one another, making them more realistic and fleshed out, before things start to tilt into the crazy horror.

I don't want to give anything away, the aim of each tale is still to deliver a fun surprise at the end, and some people may find the whole thing much more satisfying than I did, but I am struggling to think of anyone who will really enjoy this. Even if you find it passable, which I didn't, then I suspect you will still find that it suffers greatlin in comparison to almost every preceding instalment in this series. I'll still watch another one if the series continues, and I still love the VHS aesthetic, but I hope it is a marked improvement after this disappointing nadir.

4/10

Friday, 28 July 2023

The Dungeonmaster AKA Ragewar (1984)

A 1984 anthology horror/fantasy movie that uses a sci-fi premise to frame the fantastical stories, The Dungeonmaster feels far less dated nowadays than you would expect, mainly due to the main character simply using his computer to give himself what we would now recognise as a fully-loaded smart home. He even wears smart glasses to help him when outside his home. I am not saying this is as prophetic as 2001: A Space Odyssey, but it does feel more ahead of the curve than many other films from this time, even if the tech is still quite slow and clunky.

Jeffrey Byron plays Paul Bradford, the tech whizz at the heart of this. He is very happy in life, and he’s ready to take the next step with his girlfriend, Gwen (Leslie Wing). Gwen knows she risks always coming second to his computer though, so she wants some understandable reassurances. The competition for Paul’s attention turns fierce when a dangerous figure drags our leads into another world, with Paul having to pass a number of challenges set by the dungeonmaster, aka Mestema (Richard Moll), in order to keep Gwen safe and alive.

Although this IS an anthology film, with many different segments written and directed by different film-makers, from Charles Band to Ted Nicolau, it doesn’t actually feel like an anthology film. There’s a steady through line that keeps each segment, bar one, feeling strongly connected to the overarching storyline, and our hero and main villain are a constant. But it still has the advantage that every anthology horror has . . . if you aren’t enjoying one tale then you shouldn’t have to wait too long until something comes along that you might like more.

It also helps that there are various creations from John Carl Buechler on display here. He helms one segment in the film, but his fingerprints are all over the thing, with some of the wonderful puppetry and texture that any fan of the man should find absolutely delightful.

While they are not troubling anyone for awards, all three main performers do a good job with the schlocky material. Byron is a likable dweeb discovering plenty of courage for the sake of the one he loves, and uttering ridiculous lines of dialogue with conviction en route to what he hopes will be an ending that has him victorious. Wing is often left to be the damsel in distress, but she also gets to have fun in one or two other incarnations, and she remains steadfastly plucky in the face of impending doom. Then you have Moll, clearly having a lot of fun as the deadly Mestema, strolling around the sidelines like a wrestling champ waiting for his opponent to be worn down before he enters the Royal Rumble melee.

If you are after a horror movie with genuine scares then this isn’t for you. If you want a fantasy film that aims for gritty and realistic violence in a world created with high production values then this isn’t for you. Want something that makes any sense? You should also look elsewhere. But if you want something that’s a lot of fun from start to finish, has decent performances, a great panto villain, and a segment that makes use of W.A.S.P. playing one of their songs while our hero tries to get through the concert crowd to save the woman he loves . . . you know what film you can rely on. While some may view this as not as polished, or as much fun, as something like Waxwork, I would say it’s comparable, and deserves to be just as appreciated by fans as that movie is.

8/10

Saturday, 24 December 2022

Shudder Saturday: Scare Package II: Rad Chad's Revenge (2022)

The fact that I have a daily blog is only part of my reason for reviewing movies. The main reason is the fact that I watch so many movies, because I am both compelled to do so, and love doing so, and reviews can remind me of my thoughts on everything I watched. Which is why I try to review everything I watch, whether it is in-depth or in capsule form. So I dived into Scare Package II: Chad's Revenge after reading a review of Scare Package, and reminding myself that I enjoyed, but didn't exactly love, it.

What we have here is another anthology of horror tales, all of them also overflowing with humour and meta commentary, couched this time in a Saw-like framing narrative, as the mourners attending the funeral of Chad end up forced to watch some short films in between engaging in some deadly games. As well as Chad, there are a couple of other characters returning from the first movie. But who will be left alive by the time the end credits roll? And why does Chad still command so much attention from others, despite the obvious obstacle of him being dead?

Although not everyone comes back to work behind the camera on this, both Aaron B. Koontz and Cameron Burns, the main creators of the concept, once again curate a fine selection of tales from a variety of talented people, including themselves (of course), Alexandra Barreto, Anthony Cousins, Jed Shepherd, John Karsko, Ryan Schaddelee, Rachele Wiggins, and Jed Shepherd. In fact, and there's no need for me to beat about the bush here, everything here is better than what we were given in the first package. The main storyline feels less smug, the jokes and references all land better, and you get a general feeling of the central idea having been given a shot in the arm. It's so good that I'd happily now pick up both Scare Package movies in a nice double-bill set.

I won't go through every one of the segments individually, but highlights include a brilliant parody that blends Stand By Me with Re-Animator (as well as adding a touch of The Fly), the frankly near-flawless "Welcome To The '90s", which uses genre tropes to explore the changes to horror movie final girls over the years, and a reunion for most of the women who were last seen onscreen together in Host. And the main Hellraiser gag in the third act made me laugh harder than any other comedy horror moment I can think of from the past year or two, as ridiculous as it was.

The cast provides a good mix of the familiar, either due to their involvement in the first film (Jeremy King, Zoe Graham, Byron Brown, etc) or their standing in the horror genre (Kelli Maroney, Graham Skipper, Maria Olsen, and one or two others), and everyone feels very well-suited to their roles, whether they are playing a killer, an expert in horror lore, a potential survivor, or a frustrated participant in a deadly game.

I am still not sure if this just caught me in a much better mood than the first movie or whether it really was such a step up. Every gag (comedy and gore) feels like it lands, the energy of each sequence helps it to feel perfectly paced throughout, and I could have easily rewatched it as soon as my first viewing was over, knowing I missed some details and jokes that will reward repeat viewings. I hope this ends up released on some double-bill with the first movie, and I would now be eager to see if they could successfully pull off a third instalment.

8/10

Friday, 23 December 2022

The Christmas Tapes (2022)

Co-written and co-directed by Robert Livings and Randy Nundlall Jr., The Christmas Tapes is a Christmassy horror anthology movie that starts off with a bold move . . . providing an important role for Greg Sestero. That might seem a bit harsh, as he's certainly not the worst part of that infamously awful film, The Room, he may always be closely associated with, but it's worth mentioning at the very start of this review. Because it a) shows the faith that the film-makers have in their material, and b) warns viewers that they will have another chance to figure out exactly how they feel about the acting abilities of Sestero.

Sestero plays a visitor who ends up at the house of a family about to celebrate Christmas Eve. Before anyone can say "there's no room at the inn", he has taken charge of the situation, has everyone cowering in terror, and takes time to present his captive audience with a number of amateur video recordings. The first concerns a couple who go camping in the wrong neck of the woods, the second shows a man about to be delivered as a Christmas gift to his kids, by a man dressed as Santa, and the final tape shows a couple struggling to figure out the best way to clear their home of what may be a dangerous spirit. There's one other little story shoehorned in there, but it's so weak that it's not worth spending much time on. Thankfully, it's mercifully brief, but that makes it all the more surprising that it was included.

While not exactly overflowing with familiar faces, this is a film with a cast that generally acquits themselves well to what is asked of them. Sestero, for better or worse, is a name, and he's one of three used throughout the film to give viewers someone to recognise. The biggest, certainly to genre fans, is Vernon Wells, who enjoys himself as the potential delivery man dressed up as Santa Claus. You also get Dave Sheridan, stealing a number of scenes, and almost the entire movie, in the role of Paranormal Perry, a character who plays an integral role in the final tale. I am not highlighting these actors to diminish the work done by others. It's just that Livings and Nundlall Jr. seem to have deliberately planned these "special appearances" to help the pacing of the film, as well as making good use of them in roles that allow them to have fun without straying too far from their comfort zones.

Although this is an anthology movie that doesn't have the risk of too many cooks spoiling the broth, it's interesting that every short tale feels unique. I wouldn't say there's anything here that stands out as being great, but nothing stands out as being awful either (some dodgy CGI and that super-short, almost plotless, story aside). This is a surprisingly solid piece of work. It's maybe not good enough to warrant repeat viewings, or even a glowing recommendation, but I enjoyed it while it was on, and I am inclined to check out anything else from Livings and Nundlall Jr.

Audio quality is inconsistent, but never terrible, and it's a shame that the format basically ensures that the visuals lack any great style or flourishes, but there’s enough fun and creativity here to make it worthwhile. I am not sure if anyone will remember it in a few years time, but it’s always good to have a new festive horror to mix in amongst the numerous established favourites.

6/10

Monday, 19 December 2022

Mubi Monday: Sexual Drive (2021)

Sex. Not only does it sell, but it can also be a fascinating doorway into the psyche of a person. Whether that covers experiences that we could all find familiar or whether it is a unique kink, sex can be handled in a way that opens up an entire conversation about the length and breadth of human nature.

Sexual Drive is an anthology movie that shows different people involved in different sexual episodes. It’s not graphic, there’s no nudity here, but the plot hinges on people revealing intimate details about their sexual preferences. The one common denominator throughout each tale is a man named Kurita (Tateto Serizawa), spending his time onscreen either manipulating others or seemingly putting himself forward as a submissive object for the woman he has kept in his thoughts since their schooldays.

Written and directed by Kôta Yoshida, who seems to have made a huge number of films exploring sex, with some love also in the mix, Sexual Drive is a film that I cannot say I enjoyed. My first feature from Yoshida, it doesn’t do anything to spur me on to check out any of his other movies.

While the performances here are generally very good, nobody is able to overcome the surprisingly weak script. Three different tales boil down to the same core idea, someone is placed in a hugely submissive role that seriously unbalances the mindset of someone else, and that lack of imagination exemplifies what is wholly wrong about the film. This is written and directed by someone who doesn’t seem to know even a fraction of the huge spectrum of sexual preferences and sexuality. It’s the kind of tale designed for people who want to pretend they can handle adult material, but without pesky problems like bad language or nudity.

Although I am not going to discuss and rate each one of the main performances, Serizawa deserves some extra praise for his turn, and I must also mention Honami Satô for her portrayal of an object of obsession, a trigger for a very specific sexual kink, in the second, and best, tale.

Mercifully short, it clocks in at about 70 minutes, but still managing to feel slightly overlong, this is another one of many films that takes adult material and fails to treat it the right way. It’s disappointingly juvenile, one or two moments aside, and wastes an opportunity to cinematically explore sex in a constructive and satisfying way. And the last thing most people want is unsatisfying, wasted, sex. It’s why I am always surprised whenever I have managed to convince someone to date me.

3/10

Saturday, 22 October 2022

Shudder Saturday: V/H/S/99 (2022)

I'm not sure how others feel about it, but I am happy that the V/H/S horror anthology movie series has been allowed to go on for as long as it has, and long may it continue. After my disappointment with the third instalment, everything else so far has kept me very entertained, and it's almost as if each one now keeps trying to just get a little bit weirder and wilder, with the emphasis more on fun than nerve-shredding horror.

We get five tales of terror here. First up is "Shredding", written and directed by Maggie Levin. This is all about an amateur band that decides to break into an allegedly haunted, abandoned, music venue and upset some spirits by rocking out on the stage. Then it's "Suicide Bid", a Johannes Roberts-helmed story of a young woman who reluctantly agrees to be buried alive in order to be accepted into the one and only sorority she has applied to join. "Ozzy's Dungeon" (directed by Flying Lotus, who co-wrote it with Zoe Cooper) is all about the host of a children's game show being tortured by the parent of a child who was seriously injured trying to complete the final challenge on his show. "The Gawkers" (directed by Tyler MacIntyre, who co-wrote it with Chris Lee Hill) has some young men trying to spy on an attractive new neighbour . . . with complete ignorance of the danger they will find themselves in. And then, last but not least, Joseph and Vanessa Winter (aka the Deadstream people) give viewers "To Hell And Back", which is basically summed up by that title.

The only reason I won't name-check everyone onscreen here is because there are too many people to consider, as is often the case with anthology movies, but Ally Ioannides, Steven Ogg, and Melanie Stone were the highlights for me. Ioannides plays Lily, the young woman desperate to join a sorority in "Suicide Bid", Ogg plays the host of "Ozzy's Dungeon, and Stone has a lot of fun as some kind of hell imp in "To Hell And Back". I must say, however, that it's great to not want to single anyone out in a negative way. The shooting style, and ridiculousness of everything, helps, but there isn't anyone here stinking up the place.

Two tales here stood out for me, and those were "Suicide Bid" (Roberts is someone I think always deserves more love from horror fans) and "To Hell And Back" (Joseph and Vanessa Winter really underlining their emergence as names to keep an eye on). "The Gawkers" ranks just below those, boosted by a finale that makes use of a classic monster in a fun and interesting way. Then it's "Shredding", a fun start to things that is undermined by the overuse of the VHS stylisation, and "Ozzy's Dungeon" brings up the rear, although it's still perfectly enjoyable.

Even people who are used to me being quite vague in my movie reviews may feel that I have given away even less than usual here. I am erring on the side of caution, but every part of this film is more enjoyable for the fact that you can quickly figure things out as things unfold. You know that the people involved want to revel in the chance to cut loose and throw around a decent amount of insanity and gore, and every little twist or tweak is always in service of the fun factor.

If you already like this series then you should enjoy this latest entry, particularly if, like myself, you have enjoyed the revival of some modern horror anthologies that seemed destined to end on a low note some years ago.

7/10

Thursday, 20 October 2022

Books Of Blood (2020)

As much as I love the original source material, a collected volume of short stories written by Clive Barker, trying to adapt any of The Books Of Blood into movie form always feels a bit like a fool’s errand. There are so many great stories there, every page is an example of a writer delivering some of his absolute best work, but it is material that doesn’t tend to translate well into movie form. Someone should really give us all the horror anthology show that we deserve, but I suspect that will never happen.

Let’s get to this movie then, another in a line of movies that have unsuccessfully tried to make something worthwhile from the rich source material (others include Quicksilver Highway, Dread, and, well, Book Of Blood, a 2009 film that covers some of the material also covered here). There are three main stories here, focusing on four main characters. Britt Robertson is Jenna, a very depressed and troubled young woman who ends up leaving home and staying at a house that may have some very dark secrets behind the walls. Bennett (Yul Vazquez) is a man contracted to track down a valuable book, but it’s also something very powerful and dangerous. And, last but not least, Mary (Anna Friel) is a debunker of psychic phenomena who thinks she has finally found someone (Simon, played by Rafi Gavron) who can communicate with the dead.

The first feature film directed by Brannon Braga, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Adam Simon (the two having worked together for many years), there is definitely a feeling here of people trying to do more than just coast along on something with brand recognition (it might be niche brand recognition, but it’s still something a number of horror fans will take notice of). Constructed in a way that allows the tales to intersect at various points, culminating in a final act that brings everything together in a fitting and effective way, the biggest problem the film has is the time it takes to start gathering any momentum. It’s very satisfying to see things cleared up in a dark and twisting third act, but the earlier scenes feel horribly inert and disconnected until the full shape of the narrative starts to become clear, like a lump of clay being sculpted.

Robertson, Vazquez, Friel, and Gavron all do well enough in their roles, but they are characters who are due to have horrors unfold around them, like so many characters written by Barker. Friel plays the one person who ends up having most control, and her main storyline is the best of them, but the rest are very much autumn leaves blown around in some chill winds. I do also have to mention Freda Foh Shen and Nicholas Campbell. Both are used well, playing the owners of the house that ends up playing such a vital role in the fate of Robertson’s character.

Arguably better than most of the other attempts to get any of these tales from page to screen, Books Of Blood still falls short of being as good as it could, or should, be. I think one extra tale intertwining with the others would have been enough to elevate this, but I couldn’t tell you which one would have made the best addition. What you have here is polished, occasionally visually interesting, and decent enough for something to schedule when you want some spookiness. It’s just also quite forgettable, sadly, despite a bittersweet ending that stands out as one of the best horror movie endings of the last few years.

6/10

Wednesday, 19 October 2022

Prime Time: All Hallow's Eve 2 (2015)

Almost everyone seemed to enjoy All Hallow’s Eve, at least to some degree, the horror anthology movie that introduced horror fans to Art the clown. So it is no surprise to see that a sequel was made. What is slightly surprising, although also an obvious approach, is the fact that this is one of those horror anthology movies created by making use of a handful of talented people all delivering their own tales. Damien Leone, the writer-director of the first movie, was probably already too busy developing the Terrifier movies to deliver more Art “hijinks” for his fans.

The framing device here involves a young woman who has received a videotape on her doorstep. There also seems to be someone watching her. Slightly perturbed, but not half as anxious as I would be, she decides to watch the tape, which contains a mix of tales all revolving around Halloween.

With a film like this, based around so many different writers and directors, using a cast that doesn’t really have any familiar faces in the mix (the only one I immediately recognised was the excellent Bill Oberst Jr), it’s hard to sit down and write out an informative and all-encompassing review. If I went into enough detail here then you would just be reading a page full of names, and there are many other places on the internet to just read film credits.

That is also a good sign though. I don’t have any one person I want to single out, for good or bad, and that shows just how surprisingly consistent this movie is. I still have favourite tales (“Jack Attack” and “The Last Halloween” help the movie get off to a strong start), but I enjoyed pretty much everything presented here. Of course I liked some more than others, but there wasn’t any one take that I loathed.

The biggest downside is the lack of any strong through-line. The Halloween theme may be good enough to loosely link the tales together, but there’s a disappointing lack of flow as we move abruptly from one to the next, and it’s a shame that there was no room for any scenes allowing some more bleed over. There are also some sequences that look worse than others, but that just adds to the feeling of people really putting blood, sweat, and tears into getting their films made.

The cast generally do good work, everyone is clearly making the most of relatively limited resources, and there is a surprisingly high hit rate when it comes to the “punchline” of every segment. Although I didn’t absolutely love it, I would put this on a par with the first film. It’s a perfect choice for the spooky season, providing an entertaining variety of thrills and chills without outstaying its welcome.

6/10

Wednesday, 13 July 2022

Prime Time: Crooked House (2008)

Originally shown on TV in three episodes over three subsequent evenings, before being packaged presented as one omnibus a few days later, Crooked House is a polished and handsome ode to the classic horror anthologies of yesteryear. It's a blend of Hammer and Amicus with a nice spoonful of the M. R. James classics also mixed in. It's only real problem is being a bit too precious about the material, erring on the side of the classy when it could have been fun to have some more ridiculousness and bloodshed on display (if you're going to do an ode to Amicus, in particular, then it feels like a missed opportunity to not involved a dismembered hand at some point).

The tale is simple. Ben Morris (Lee Ingleby) has found an antique door knocker. When he takes it to a local museum, the curator (Mark Gatiss) recognises it as having once been attached to a notorious, cursed house, the recently demolished Geap Manor. He tells Ben a couple of tales from the history of the door knocker, one involving some poorly-chosen wainscoting and the other involved a ghostly bride, but those end up being nothing more than light distractions once the third tale starts to unfold. The third tale isn't one that Ben is told. It is one that he is part of, and he soon realises that a horror may be trying to reach through the many years of the past to get to him in the present.

Also written and co-produced by Gatiss, which is obvious as soon as you start to hear some of the wonderful dialogue being delivered, this is an interesting film, one that feels as if it is overstretching slightly while trying to straddle the large gap between the past and the present day. It's either coincidence or clever meta writing that has the content reflected by the presentation (knowing Gatiss, I would lean towards the latter there), but the fact that the end result ends up being successful is just as much down to the cast as it is to the writing and direction (from Damon Thomas).

The first tale has the most treats. Philip Jackson is the man having his home renovated, after making a fortune in a deal that ruined others, and drove one to suicide. The wainscoting that will drive him to distraction is made all the more effective thanks to the great performance from Jackson, who is full of bluster and self-importance. He is joined in a number of scenes by Andy Nyman and Julian Rhind-Tutt, both a lot of fun in their roles, and Beth Goddard steals a couple of moments as a widow pointing a finger of accusation at Jackson's character. The second tale doesn't really have any standout performances, and is the least enjoyable of the three we get here, but it does well with the atmosphere and imagery. Thankfully, Ingleby and Gatiss do great work, and Daniela Denby-Ashe also helps things along with her pivotal supporting role.

Although I wish there was a bit more here, in terms of the scares and blood, I also recognise that this is being crafted in line with the more traditional, and restrained, ghost stories that form the bedrock of a wonderfully spooky tradition (the ghost story at Christmas, which is why this was first shown on TV at that time of year). It's just a shame when the film/episodes veer between feeling like a wonderful homage and feeling like an academic exercise, the balancing act proving to be occasionally too much for Gatiss.

ALSO, a minor note, it would have been nice to see one of the tales have more of a seasonal feel. Not essential, but an extra layer of autumnal chill would have been most welcome. Maybe that's just me though, and maybe not helped by me watching this in the midst of summer.

7/10

Friday, 8 July 2022

After Midnight (1989)

One of many films perhaps better left as a fond memory than one to search out and rewatch, After Midnight is a slick horror anthology movie, written and directed by Jim and Ken Wheat, that frames three tales in the kind of wraparound that is both enjoyable and predictable, considering how it stems back to what is arguably the granddaddy of horror anthology movies (you know the one I mean).

Things begin with Allison (Jillian McWhirter) having a bad feeling about things. She explains this to her friend, Cheryl (Pamela Adlon), but is unable to be much more specific. Her nerves don’t look to settles down any when she sits down for a class called “Psychology Of Fear”, presented in an unorthodox manner by Professor Edward Derek (Ramy Zada). The Professor is so unorthodox that he is soon told off for his teaching methods, which leads to him inviting a number of students to his home for some late-night tales of terror. That allows viewers to see “The Old Dark House”, “A Night On The Town”, and “All Night Operator”. And, as those tales are being told, a disgruntled student (Russ, played by Ed Monaghan) plans to give the Professor one extra scare.

As with any horror anthology movie, there is an uneven mix here, and different people will have a different favourite. I personally think it is all downhill after the wonderful punchline of “The Old Dark House”, the tale of a young couple who end up wandering through the titular building after they have a tyre blow out on the long drive home. Some people may prefer the tension of the girls being chased by vicious dogs in “A Night On The Town”. And “All Night Operator” tries to tap into that When A Stranger Calls ability to raise goosebumps. It’s the scenes bookending the film that stay consistently stronger than any other tale though, with moments of enjoyable insanity that feel less cosy or safe than anything in the other stories.

Although the writing and direction aren’t terrible, both leave something to be desired. The big problem is pacing. This is a 90-minute movie that feels overlong. Shaving down each individual story and fitting in an extra little stinger would have helped massively, especially when in “A Night On The Town” (reduce it to one girl alone, and cut to the chase - no pun intended - even quicker). I would have also liked to see some more excuses for some fun gore gags. This feels like a TV movie for most of the runtime, which is disappointing.

The acting is perfectly fine, and each story usually has one or two familiar faces to catch your eye. Zada is a lot of fun as the Professor, moving easily from the professional to the possibly unhinged, depending on how strenuously he is trying to make a point about fear. McWhirter has to look uneasy for most of her screentime, which she does, and Monaghan is good value as the young man fairly reasonably upset by the teaching methods of the Professor. Mark McClure and Nadine Van der Velde do good work as they wander around “The Old Dark House”, Penelope Sudrow (well-known to horror fans for being given her “big break in TV” by Freddy Krueger) is the most recognisable member of the group being chased in “A Night On The Town”, and Marg Helgenberger is as good as ever in her role, the phone operator having trouble with a nuisance caller, to say the least.

There’s enough here to make After Midnight worth your time, not least a final few minutes that wonderfully move the dial from zero to insanity at breakneck speed. It’s no classic, but it’s an earnest attempt to add a worthwhile horror anthology to the subgenre. I will always have a soft spot for it. I just might never rewatch it again.

6/10

Thursday, 12 May 2022

The House Of The Dead (1978)

The only theatrical feature film directed by Sharron Miller, who has since built up a body of work made up of TV shows (and at least one TV movie), The House Of The Dead is a horror anthology that suffers in comparison to other horror anthology movies, but it's actually far from the worst of them.

John Ericson plays Talmudge, a man who we see leaving a lover to head home to his wife. There's a heavy rainstorm though, and that stops him from getting back to his hotel. He ends up receiving shelter from a mortician (Ivor Francis), who decides to show him some recent “clients” and relates the tales of their untimely ends. A grumpy teacher (Judith Novgrod) is terrorised. A prolific killer (Burr DeBenning) likes to film all of his exploits, which means the second tale displays footage seized from his home/lair. A pair of detectives (played by Charles Aidman and Bernard Fox) engage in a deadly battle of wits. Finally, a man named Cantwell (Richard Gates) ends up having his life completely changed once he falls into a lift shaft.

Writer David O’Malley (who also wrote both The Boogens and the wonderful Fatal Instinct) tries to deliver a number of tales that feel relatively fresh, especially when compared to many other anthology horror tales. Although not successful, in terms of the scares and entertainment factor, it’s interesting enough (once it gets the weakest first tale out of the way). A better cast would have helped, and a bit more inventiveness and energy from Miller’s direction.

Ericson and Francis are fine in their roles, going through the motions in a framing segment that is winding towards a predictable ending, but nobody else is really worth mentioning. Maybe DeBenning, who at least delivers a cold and unflinching portrayal of a psychopath who tries to put people at ease before going in for the kill, but will also do whatever it takes to get the job done once suspicions have been aroused. Novgrod is very forgettable, Aidman and Fox at least have a bit of fun sparring with one another, and Gates is stuck with a story that requires him to deliver a near-parodic interpretation of someone who finds that their position in society has just been radically changed.

So the cast isn’t the greatest, the material isn’t the strongest, and nothing here is unmissable, but I still think someone better at the helm could have made this into a film that is more fondly remembered today. Although it clocks in at just under the 80-minute mark, it feels slightly overlong. There isn’t one single moment that doesn’t look like it could have been lifted from something like Tales Of The Unexpected (a great TV show, but one that always absolutely felt like TV, as many shows did before television became more and more cinematic). Even one truly great scare or gore gag would have helped, but there are none to be found here.

Yet I somehow liked this. O’Malley tries to bolt some modern sensibilities on to the format in a way that at least feels interesting and is trying not to be lazy. It’s just a shame that his writing couldn’t be lifted up by anyone else working on the film.

6/10

Thursday, 30 December 2021

13 Slays Till Christmas (2020)

On the one hand, part of me wants to give a bit of credit to any independent horror movie that is set at Christmas and doesn't make use of the word "Krampus" in the title. I also generally want to give a bit of credit when I can to any independent horror. As much as I like a lot of the mainstream stuff, and I do, it's always great to see the variety on offer for horror fans. It saves us from being stuck with a hundred attempts to remake The Conjuring every year (although, yes, we also still get that happening). On the other hand, I still have to call out bad film-making when too many negatives outweigh the positives.

13 Slays Till Christmas, an anthology horror movie with plenty of blood-spattered Christmas decorations in each tale, is far from the worst film I have seen. It just feels exactly like what it is, a low-budget horror movie cramming together over a dozen different writers and directors. There's no cohesion, very little real inventiveness (almost every tale simply ends with someone being killed), and not enough attempts to hide the shortcomings of the meagre budget.

I'm not going to name the creative talent behind the camera here, nor am I going to name any of the individual cast members. That's not to be dismissive of their contributions to the film. It just means that I am not unwittingly being too mean to people who have given their time and energy to making something that didn't work for me.

Whether intentional or not, this feels quite lazily thrown together. I don't think that is actually the case, considering some of the fun little references to other horror movies woven throughout the script and the production design (although references shouldn't be used in place of material with a bit more substance), but the end result doesn't look great for anyone involved.

I cannot name one of the many underwhelming stories as a highlight, the special effects are pretty poor, and there isn't even a vein of enjoyable dark humour running through things to make it all more enjoyable. I am sure that some people will argue that last point, and humour is as subjective as many other elements we can love or hate in movies, but I didn't notice any appreciable "through line", even if one or two story endings were individually mirthful and macabre.

I was really hoping to enjoy this, especially as it seems to have been a bit of a lean time recently for Christmas horrors, but it wasn't to be. I didn't care about any of the characters, I barely got to know who some of the other characters were, and boredom started to set in early on, once I realised that many of the stories were working with very similar templates.

There are people who will undoubtedly love this, whether it is for the actual content or for the sake of supporting the creators, or both. More power to them. I sat through it once, and I'll never knowingly choose to sit through it again.

3/10

For those who may want to order this, or just check out Blood Moon Pictures, here is a link. Remember that my opinion is just that, MY opinion, and I certainly hope that some people still opt to check out the movie and decide whether to agree with me or not.

Saturday, 25 December 2021

Shudder Saturday: Screams Of A Winter Night (1979)

Be warned, despite the title, this isn't exactly prime Christmas movie material. It doesn't even feel very Wintery, more's the pity.

I'm not sure exactly what Screams Of A Winter Night was intended to be, other than a standard horror anthology, but it has ended up being something that people will remember for all the wrong reasons. It's pretty badly put together, with a real lack of visual style and some lacklustre audio work, and many scenes feel as if they have been done better in other films. Because they usually have.

I'll try to flesh out the plot slightly. A large group of friends head off on a trip to a lakeside cabin. The area around the cabin has been the scene of some mysterious deaths, which adds to the atmosphere. And John (Matt Borel) wants some decent atmosphere, especially when he starts to tell a tale of terror. Different people take turns to tell their stories, four in all (in THIS particular version of the film, although it was originally released with only the three tales intact).

None of the stories told here have a very effective ending, and one or two feel like they have no real ending at all, while the wraparound tale is as dull as the murky countryside that surrounds the cast of characters. Worst of all, most of the film is just dull. There are no good frights, no decent moments of bloodshed, and no wit to detract from the lack of originality.

Apparently the only film directed by James L. Wilson, as well as the only film written by Richard H. Wadsack, let me take a moment here to offer some genuine praise for the idea of Wilson and co. getting together and getting this film made. Although they were unable to effectively stretch the budget, the fact that they get this end result from such obviously limited resources is something worth giving them credit for. The lack of resources also makes for some creative choices, with one good idea being the use of certain cast members to play characters being depicted in the various tales.

"Recycling" the cast would work even better if the cast was full of talented thespians. Sadly, that is not the case. Nobody stands out for the right reasons, with Borel being one of the few that I'll mention because of his character being the nominal leader of the group. The other person of note is William Ragsdale, making his first feature film appearance over five years before he would get a much better role in the superb Fright Night.

In case you weren't sure, this is one to avoid. It also feels overlong with the fourth tale included, although I don't think the shorter version of the film would improve things enough (as a lot of the early scenes are a real chore to get through). It's certainly not a scream.

3/10