Prime Time: Elevation (2024)

Set three years after a world-altering event, Elevation is the story of humans surviving in a new position on the food chain. They're safe if they stay over 8000 feet, but some supplies are required. In fact, Will (Anthony Mackie) knows that he must explore beyond the safety zone in order to get a filter for oxygen filters that are necessary for the health and life of his young son, Hunter (Danny Boyd Jr.). Will convinces Nina (Morena Baccarin) to join him on his journey. Nina is a scientist who has spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to destroy the seemingly-indestructible predators that turned their world upside-down, and she was on a previous expedition that involved the death of Will's wife, Tara. Joining this duo is Katie, a good friend who refuses to let Will head off on such a dangerous mission with only Nina alongside him. And so begins an illogical distraction that should at least keep most viewers mildly distracted for 92 minutes.

There are some ways in which I cannot help but think of Elevation as something truly terrible. Unless we're supposed to be able to figure out all of the science for ourselves, there isn't enough information given for a couple of key points. One major detail, the reason for the safety zone of 8000 feet, is so ridiculous that even one main character asks about it at one point and is answered with a simple "I don't know". It feels as if this wants to be another A Quiet Place, or at least something very similar, but that film had enough excellent moments to help you overlook the plot holes and implausibilities. This does not. What it has is a couple of very watchable cast members in main roles.

Mackie is always very good onscreen, and I'm always happy to see him make the most of any opportunities that allow him to sneak out from under the looming shadow of his Marvel employer,  but he really needs to start making some better choices. A quick look at his filmography over the last five years doesn't paint a very pretty picture. I could say something similar about Morena Baccarin, but she has a knack for picking projects that at least feel a bit more eclectic, even if they're not actually very good. As the third wheel, Hasson does well alongside the two bigger names, even if she's only there to help give viewers someone else to be placed in peril as and when some more tension is required.

I've seen at least one other film directed by George Nolfi (that was The Adjustment Bureau way back when), and I've seen a few films written by John Glenn, but nothing, as far as I'm aware, from his co-writers, Jacob Roman and Kenny Ryan. That seems about right, considering how this feels strangely competent and slick, but also quite amateurish at times. It's a film made by throwing together elements that have worked better in many other films, but there's no real attempt made to then make it all a bit better. Pardon the pun, nobody seems to elevate the material.

That's the thing though. This is perfectly okay. If you have nothing better to hand. It's very standard content, and it feels like very standard content. I would have just preferred to have it feel like an actual movie though. Because movies are more than just content.

5/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
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 

Malignant (2021)

There are some things to consider about the conversations people have been having about Malignant, the latest horror movie from James Wan. First of all, the fact that it is a very divisive film isn’t necessarily a negative. Whether you end up loving or hating this, kudos to Wan for taking such a huge swing with it. Secondly, someone having a different opinion of it does not mean they didn’t “get it”, even if the film has a lot in there that will be recognised mainly by older horror fans who are more likely to spot the many influences, from giallo to grindhouse films. Third, you can enjoy a movie without loving absolutely everything it does. Despite what the internet may be telling us, reactions still do not have to be absolutely weighted to one end or the other.

Now we can get to the film itself. Annabelle Wallis plays Madison Mitchell, a woman who starts to experience visions of violent murders. Knowing a bit too much, and the victim of an attack herself, the police start to consider Madison as a suspect, especially when it turns out that she has connections to the victims. Does this mean that Madison’s childhood friend, a presence nobody else would ever see, has reappeared?

Although it’s not just Wallis onscreen, with supporting turns from Maddie Hasson, George Young, Michole Briana White, it’s a film that stays so focused on her character, and people are asked to act in a certain way, most of the cast are secondary to the vision of Wan. Simply there to be puppeteered, ironically. It’s hard to judge people for performances that have been directed in a very specific way. Although Marina Mazepa deserves a special mention for her outstanding physical performance.

The script, written by Akela Cooper (from a story thrashed out in conjunction with Wan and Ingrid Bisu), is pretty terrible. It’s the combination of bad writing and weak acting that has led to so many people saying that Wan has delivered a wild American giallo, but that claim forgives a lot of mis-steps. There’s no style here good enough to feel faithful to the giallo flicks it wants to emulate, a lot of it overshadowed by horribly unnecessary CGI, and the bonkers ending is disappointingly telegraphed from the earliest scenes (and giallo fans will know that most of the maddest endings they have enjoyed have been anything but predictable).

As inevitable as the final act is, it is also where Wan pulls out all of the stops and presents an audaciously fun sequence that makes the whole film worth your time. Perhaps that is a sign that he is more at home wallowing in gore and carnage than trying to be stylish and homaging giallo flicks, but it certainly allows him to provide nods, some bigger than others, to the works of Frank Henenlotter, Stephen King, Brian De Palma, and his good friend, Leigh Whannell. I don’t mind this pick ‘n’ mix approach when the end result is such a hoot, and nobody will feel bored by the time the end credits roll.

Malignant is good, sometimes really good, but the first hour or so isn’t. You have some disappointingly weak death scenes, characters it is hard to really care about, a score from Joseph Bishara that doesn’t really work alongside the visuals most of the time, and constant overuse of CGI when practical effects would have added to the overall feel that Wan was aiming for. That final act makes up for a multitude of small sins, however, and how far it pushes the envelope towards real cinematic insanity makes it one of the strangest horrors to be pushed into the mainstream in a very long time. Which makes it worth your time and support.

7/10

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

We Summon The Darkness (2019)

There's humour in We Summon The Darkness, but it's not really a horror comedy. There's a period setting (late 1980s), but that's not really ever a focus, apart from giving a more realistic grounding for the wild central plot. And there's a good cast, but they're not used as well as they could be. In fact, everything in We Summon The Darkness feels a bit half-assed, to use the technical term.

Alexis, Valerie, and Beverly are three young women on their way to see a heavy metal show. Once there, they meet three boys they seem to click with. The girls invite the boys back to an empty house they're staying at, the perfect spot for some more drinking and partying. But should these youngsters all be letting their hair down in the middle of nowhere, especially with the recent spate of Satanic cult murders?

Writer Alan Trezza previously gave genre fans Burying The Ex, a fun little film enjoyed by myself and about ten other people (so it would seem). That also had Alexandra Daddario in a starring role (she plays Alexis here), but she was surrounded by Ashley Greene and Anton Yelchin. It was also directed by Joe Dante, which was a big plus. Similar to this, Burying The Ex had one neat little idea at the heart of it. Unfortunately, We Summon The Darkness doesn't have anything of note beyond the one little idea it has (a plot beat that is surprisingly predictable from the very opening scenes).

Director Marc Meyers isn't someone incapable of doing good work. But he's no Joe Dante. The biggest mistake that Meyers makes is having complete fait in the script from Trezza, which means neither party does enough to make this as good as it could be.

Daddario does well in her role, although she's the weakest of the three main female cast members, and Maddie Hanson and Amy Forsyth are good in the roles of Val and Bev, respectively, with Forsyth easily the strongest of the three. As for the boys, Keean Johnson, Logan Miller, and Austin Swift are a good mix, even if their very first appearance onscreen doesn't bode well. Other characters pop in and out of the narrative, but the only other one worthy of note is Pastor John Henry Butler, played in an enjoyably atypical way by Johnny Knoxville (who I would very much like to see get a meatier role in this vein).

There's entertainment to be had here, Meyers does just fine with the technical side of things, despite lacking the ability to elevate the material, but We Summon The Darkness feels very much like some comedy act in which the performer is very proud of his jokes, especially one he drops on the audience early on to set the tone, while every audience member sits patiently and waits for the big laugh that never comes. There's nothing here that will make you remember the movie hours after you've watched it, and I can't help thinking it is destined to become a forgotten obscurity within the next year or two. I also can't help thinking that it wouldn't have taken too much effort to save it from that fate. It's a shame that Meyers and Trezza weren't able to make that effort.

5/10

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