It (2017)

Adapting what is, for many, a formative reading experience into a movie is always a challenge. Attempting to do that after there's already been a fantastic, and beloved, TV movie adaptation that many still view as definitive and iconic would seem to be a fool's errand. It's happened before with Stephen King works though, and I have no doubt that it will happen again. I'm not sure I would mind if they all turned out as well as this.

It, and it's worth mentioning for those who may be unaware that this is the first, albeit nicely self-contained, part of an enjoyably sprawling horror story that is spread out over two movies, is all about a group of youngster who help one another survive an extremely deadly summer in Derry, Maine. They all end up being affected by a creature that can take on the shape of their fears, although it mostly catches victims while in the shape of Pennywise the clown (Bill Skarsgård, doing such a great job that he somehow manages to equal the nightmare-inducing performance given by Tim Curry in the 1990 TV movie). That's all you need to know. Seven children, a lifelong bonding experience, and a killer clown.

Having very recently rewatched this, I am sure that I was a bit harsh on It during my first viewing experience. I did praise certain elements, particularly the mix of scares and bloodshed without a reliance on either, but I also mentioned some unnecessary CGI used, a slightly weak script, and the fact that the main characters weren't really. Well . . . present me disagrees with the past me (although I still think there are one or two bits of CGI work that didn't have to be done that way, or maybe even done at all).

With Chase Palmer, Cary Fukunaga, and Gary Dauberman figuring out the best ways to turn King's major tome into a satisfying screenplay, Andy Muschietti can stay focused on direction. The screenplay is a great blend of coming-of-age episodes and well-executed scares, even if a number of them are jump scares, and Muschietti serves the material well. The film is, in many ways, a mood piece, a painting by someone who wants to depict growing pains and common anxieties in the same picture. And, in that regard, it works. In fact, it works brilliantly, constantly evoking a growing sense of nostalgia, the blossoming of dark petals of sadness, and an impressive sprinkling of dread over every main sequence.

There are no weak performances to critique, which makes it easy for me to simply namecheck all seven members of "The Loser's Club" here; Jaeden Martell (Bill, credited here as Jaeden Lieberher), Sophia Lillis (Beverly), Jeremy Ray Taylor (Ben), Finn Wolfhard (Richie), Chosen Jacobs (Mike), Jack Dylan Grazer (Eddie), and Wyatt Oleff (Stanley). All of these characters get enough time and space to feel like more than just a scared victim, and the cast members are all perfectly cast. Nicholas Hamilton and Owen Teague are also very good, although they are given the unenviable task of playing typical King bullies who are, and Jackson Robert Scott does well enough in the role of young Georgie to cast a suitable little shadow over the entire film. As for Skarsgård, he's a creepy and brilliant delight in ways that I cannot even begin to list here. Whether pretending to be innocent and fun or showing a hint of his true evil nature, he's always an interesting depiction of a monster never quite comfortable enough in any one form to fully convince people that there's no threat nearby.

The 135-minute runtime ticks over without any pacing issues, those responsible for the adaptation from page to screen have great instincts for what to show, what to imply, and what to completely excise, and the whole thing is just about as good as you can get, certainly in the realm of modern mainstream horror. It's still hard to watch without thinking of the novel, or thinking of that beloved TV movie, but it's easily up there with the very best King movies (and the top of that particular tree has some real classics nesting there).

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

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire (2024)

Ghostbusters is forty years old now. Forty years old. It is, in my view, an enduring classic, and one of my favourite blockbuster comedies. And yet . . . the fact that it IS now forty years old makes it all the stranger to see how much of it is repeated and/or repurposed in this latest release, officially the fifth movie in a franchise that has maintained a presence in our pop culture thanks to the various movies, videogames, toys, cartoons, etc.

FIRE STATION!

There is probably a right way and a wrong way to write a proper review of Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire, but I hope doing things in the wrong way will highlight how the film itself was so mishandled.

SLIMER!

Some time has passed since the events of the last movie. Our main characters (played by Finn Wolfhard, Mckenna Grace, Paul Rudd, and Carrie Coon) are now based in New York, much to the chagrin of the current mayor (played by William Atherton, reprising the character of Walter Peck, of course). But the containment system is perilously close to being overloaded, a big new threat is looming, and the character played by Grace ends up spending a lot of her time with a friendly ghost (Melody, played by Emily Alyn Lind).

LIBRARY GHOST!

Co-written once again by Gil Kenan and Jason Reitman, with the former also being allowed to direct this time around, it’s easy to see why certain choices were made here, and just as easy to see how this film could have been greatly improved. It’s too busy creating moments that will remind you of the first movie that it forgets to make good use of most of the main characters, and the decent finale is a case of too little too late when viewers have slogged through the mess preceding it.

DAN AYKROYD!

There’s some good stuff here, much better than the return of a familiar villain we got in the last movie. The opening sequence is great, everything looks set to be spectacular and thrilling, and then it is all largely abandoned in favour of callbacks and cameos, which is all the more frustrating when you get a treat like the new character, Lars, played by James Acaster with a hairstyle not entirely dissimilar to the one sported by Egon Spengler in The Real Ghostbusters. I also have to say that Lind is fantastic as the forlorn and regret-filled Melody.

STAY-PUFT MARSHMALLOW MAN!

It is hard to give my opinion on a cast who are so often wasted in their roles. Grace remains a very watchable talent, but her sub-plot here ensures that her character is unwisely kept moody and lonely until the third act. Acaster is a fantastic addition, it’s nice to see some more of Ernie Hudson, Patton Oswalt comes along to be Mr. Exposition, and Kumail Nanjiani isn’t given a chance to be as funny as we all know he can be. As for the other familiar faces, they are all pretty unnecessary.

BILL MURRAY!

This is a series that seems intent on restricting itself to tales that are now just frames to hang a load of nostalgia on. It’s not a good approach, and this review emulated the structure of the film. You have everything punctuated by a cameo that is supposed to bring some extra happiness to the viewers, but it doesn’t work when there is no other reason for those cameos to happen. It’s the equivalent of some SNL sketch being hate-crashed by a celebrity who just comments on their own celebrity and their bemusement at being on SNL. That could be amusing, but you would soon tire of it if it was every SNL sketch. And you will soon tire of it here.

BILL MURRAY AGAIN!

Each time I think this movie series cannot get any worse I end up being proven wrong. It has become a depressing cycle of ever-diminishing returns now, and I am always sucked in by the trailer and the optimistic idea that “maybe this time they will get it right”. This is the worst yet, and actually feels embarrassingly desperate at times.

I will still watch another one, but you may as well search for my spark of hope in the ecto-containment unit, because that is well and truly dead after watching this.

3/10

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

Prime Time: The Turning (2020)

Having actually read “The Turn Of The Screw” some years ago, the classic horror tale from Henry James, I am very familiar with, and a big fan of, the story beats. I am also a big fan of The Innocents, and have even been lucky enough to see it adapted into a stage version that included puppets. Because what isn’t made better by puppets?

Despite the poor to middling reviews, I was looking forward to this interpretation of the tale. Mainly because I would always be happy to see it delivered to new audiences. And I am a massive fan of Mackenzie Davis.

Davis plays Kate Mandell, a young woman who takes a job teaching one young child, Flora (Brooklynn Prince) in a large house that only contains the two of them and the live-in helper, Mrs. Gross (Barbara Marten). All seems okay at the start, but tensions soon rise when Flora’s older brother, Miles (Finn Wolfhard) unexpectedly comes home from school. And something bad happened between the other staff who used to be employed there.

Written by Chad and Carey W. Hayes, possibly best known for writing The Conjuring, The Turning is a strange misfire that ultimately lets down everyone involved, and the blame needs to be shared out by the writers, and director Floria Sigismondi. 

Those familiar with the tale already will undoubtedly wonder why so much of the ambiguity seems to have been removed. There’s also the strange decision to set it in the 1990s, without that really factoring in at all. And don’t get me started on the absolutely atrocious ending, which I am sure was intended to make up for the rest of the mishandled third act. But doesn’t.

The cast don’t do a bad job, but cannot distract from writing and direction that wants to undermine the better elements of the story. Davis is particularly good in the lead role, just the right amount of warmth, naïveté, and nervousness, while both Prince and Wolfhard do well, even if the latter suffers from the fact that his character is written to be so unsympathetic. Marten is a formidable figure, and the far-too-brief screentime for Joely Richardson allows her to make a strong impression, even if the inclusion of her character feels largely redundant until the very end of the film.

The Turning is ultimately a drama that is hard to care about, a horror film with no actual scares or atmosphere, and only really serves as a shining example of how not to reinterpret a classic for modern audiences.

4/10

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

The Addams Family (2019)

I think it's safe to say that when most people heard about an animated movie version of The Addams Family, it didn't seem to be the best idea. Having now seen the film, it was actually a smart way to refresh the property and present it to a new audience. Can you imagine a new live-action version? Who would try to replace the incomparable Raul Julia and Anjelica Huston? This side-steps that problem, but also assembles a bloody great voice cast to take on the iconic roles.

The plot is nice and simple. We start with Morticia (Charlize Theron) and Gomez (Oscar Isaac) about to get married. Angry locals barge into the ceremony, and the Addams family end up in the old gothic home that we know. Life seems good, even as Wednesday (Chloë Grace Moretz) and Pugsley (Finn Wolfhard) spend most of their time trying to harm one another. But things are happening downhill from their home, where Margaux Needler (Allison Janney), a famous TV home makeover personality is creating a whole idyllic little suburb. She wants it to be perfect, and wants to make a profit from selling all of the homes, so when the Addams home comes into view . . . something has to be done about it.

This is a very pleasant surprise from start to finish. The screenplay, by Matt Lieberman (with a number of people involved in shaping the story), is full of fun little gags most people would expect from any Addams Family tale. There are the usual macabre details, the sibling rivalry, a big family event coming up, and even a fun story strand that sees Wednesday becoming slightly corrupted by the influence of a young girl she befriends (when I say corrupted I mean there's at least one worrying moment when Wednesday looks to add a bit of colour to her usual look).

The direction from Greg Tiernan and Conrad Vernon all seems fine (even if it is a mile away from their last feature, Sausage Party, although both men have a good selection of child-friendly work in their filmography) as they take simple plot beats and allow the characters to lift the material. You also get a couple of musical moments, including the familiar theme near the start of the movie, and some enjoyably over the top fight choreography (mainly between Gomez and Pudsley, as the former prepares the latter for a rite of passage ceremony that will take place in front of the whole family.

Theron and Isaac are great in the lead roles, and I think both COULD possibly work as live-action versions of these characters, and Moretz, Wolfhard, and Kroll are very enjoyable as the two kids and Uncle Fester, respectively. Janney is as fun as she usually is, and her voice also perfectly suits her character, while everyone else does decent work. It's also worth noting that, despite not really being as recognisable as usual, it's fun to have Snoop Dogg voicing Cousin It.

I hoped that this wouldn't prove to be too painful. Instead, I ended up quite enjoying it. It still sits behind the Sonnenfeld movies and the TV show, but it's a nicely detailed bit of fun that balances everything between the fun for kids and the recognisable elements that fans of the characters will appreciate.

7/10

You can buy the movie here.
Americans can buy it here.